S. NIRMAL KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, a resident of Kanchipuram District, has filed this petition, for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4, to create awareness, about the concept and reason behind for introduction of NOTA (None of the above), for the forthcoming Lok Sabha, as well as Legislative Assembly Elections, in the State of Tamil Nadu amongst the people, especially new/first time voters and aged people, across India through indoor and outdoor media, such as Mobile APP, Television, Radio, print, social and digital media, Cinemas and etc., as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the judgment, dated 27/9/2013, passed in W.P.(C) No.161 of 2004, People's Union for Civil Liberties Vs. Union of India.

(2.) Heard Mr.Prakash Adiapadam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan, learned Standing counsel for the Election Commission of India.

(3.) The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in {(2013) 10 SCC - 1} People's Union for Civil Liberties and Another Vs. Union of India and Another, was dealing with a petition, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the constitutional validity, by Rules 41 (2), (3) and 49 (o) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, to the extent that these provisions violate secrecy of voting. Petitioners, in the said petition, approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court, for the issuance of a writ or direction (s) of like nature, on the ground that though the abovesaid rules, viz., Rules 41 (2) and (3) and 49 - O, of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, recognise the right of a voter not to vote, but still the secrecy of his having not voted is not maintained in its implementation and thus the impugned rules, to the extent of such violation of the right to secrecy, are not only ultra vires to the said Rules but also violative of Articles 19 (1) (a) and 21 of the Constitution of India besides international covenants. The petitioners therein prayed for, declaring Rules 41 (2) and (3) and 49 - O of the Rules, ultra vires and unconstitutional and also prayed for a direction to the Election Commission of India, respondent No.2 herein, to provide necessary provision, in the ballot papers as well as in the electronic voting machines, for the protection of the right of not to vote, in order to keep the exercise of such right a secret under the existing RP Act/the Rules or under Article 324 of the Constitution. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under:-