HEM RAJ ARYA Vs. ELECTION COMMISSION DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule D.B.

(2.) Since in this matter a very short question is involved and we have heard counsel for the parties at length, we propose to dispose of the writ petition at this stage itself.

(3.) Challenge in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the two Notifications dated 23 March 1994 and 31 December 1993, both issued by the first respondent viz., the Election Commissioner of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, notifying the reservation for allotment of seats for women, mbers of the Scheduled Castes and women belonging to Scheduled Castes and the manner of reservation and rotation of reserved seats in different wards and calling upon the electorates of all the 134 wards to elect Councillors for the purpose of constitution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (for short the MCD) under Section 3 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, as amended by the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 1993 (for short the Act) respectively. There are three petitioners, who claim to be the office bearers of the Delhi Pradesh Janta Dal and four respondents, being the Election Commission, Delhi, the Chief Electoral Officer, Delhi, Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and the Chief Election Commissioner of India.