ACHAL MEHROTRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocates for the parties.

(2.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notification issued by the State Election Commissioner on October 23, 1998 being Annexure-1 to the writ petition and the amendment thereto made on April 26, 2000, being Anncxure-2 to the writ petition. Grievance of the writ petitioner is that the State Election Commissioner did not issue correctly notification for registration of political parties for holding election. The State Election Commissioner, for the purpose of holding Municipal election has issued notification for the purpose of registration of the political parties, which according to the petitioner goes contrary to the principles laid down in the Constitution, since the Constitution contemplates participation of political parties in the election to the Central Legislature and the State Legislature. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Constitution does not contemplate Municipal election to be contested by political parties and as such, the notification goes against the spirit of the Constitution. It is further submitted that there is basic difference between the Election Commission of India and the State Election Commission. So far as Election Commission of India is concerned, Article 324 of the Constitution provides for the same, which is quoted below :

(3.) Article 243K of the Constitution provides for the purpose of elections of the panchayats and Article 243ZA of the Constitution provides for the purpose of elections of the Municipalities, which are quoted below :