DESH RAJ SHARMA Vs. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 8th December, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner on the ground that the appellant has not been able to make out a case for interference with the order of the Deputy Election Commissioner dated 31st March, 2005.

(2.) The appellant had challenged and questioned the merger of the Himachal Vikas Congress with the Indian National Congress. The said challenge was rejected by the Election Commission under order dated 31st March, 2005. In the writ petition another relief sought for by the appellant was for direction to the Election Commission of India to declare that there was no merger of Himachal Vikas Congress with the Indian National Congress. The Election Commission considered the entire records and thereafter held that Himachal Vikas Congress had legally merged with the Indian National Congress and the challenge made to the aforesaid merger by the appellant herein is baseless.

(3.) In fact both, the Election Commission and the learned Single Judge have held that the appellant does not have locus standi to question the merger as the appellant was not primary member of the Himachal Vikas Congress party on the date of merger in 2004 having resigned in 1999. In paragraph 16 of the order passed by the Election Commission, it was pointed out that the appellant had written letter dated 28th July, 1999 addressed to Pt. Sukh Ram, who was the then party president of the Himachal Vikas Congress whereunder the appellant herein expressly resigned from the party i.e. Himachal Vikas Congress. The said fact of resignation of the appellant from Himachal Viikas Congress party is also supported by the written communication to the Election Commission dated 26th August, 2004 In paragraph 1 of the said letter the appellant has stated that ? Yes I had left the party in 1999 against the dictatorial functioning of Pt. Sukh Ram alongwith many others.? There is no record or document to show and establish that the appellant had subsequently sought for re-entry and admission as a primary member and was admitted to the party.