SRI RANEDRA PRATAP SWAIN Vs. RETURNING OFFICER, 89-ATHAGARH ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY-CUM-SUB COLLECTOR, AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri A.K. Mohapatra, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Shri D.P. Dhal, learned Counsel for opposite party no 3, learned Additional Government Advocate for opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 Shri J.K. Mishra, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the Election Commission.

(2.) THIS is the second innings of the Petitioner. Earlier the Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 5468 of 2009 when his nomination paper was rejected by the Returning Officer of 89 -Athagarh Assembly Constituency on the ground that the authorization that he was se up by a recognized political party, i.e. Forms A and B were not submitted in original with the signature in ink. The nomination was rejected on 06.04.2009. This Court did not interfere with the same as the writ petition was not maintainable. However, liberty was given to the Petitioner to approach the Election Commission of India in view of Article 324 (1) of the Constitution of India whereunder the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all election to parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the offices of President and Vice -President held under this Constitution shall be vested in the Election Commission keeping in mind the decision of the apex Court in Mohinder Singh Gill and Anr. v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Ors. : AIR 1978 S.C. 851 in which the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble apex Court held that after the notification has been issued by the President, the entire electoral process is in the charge of the Election Commission and the Commission is exclusively responsible for the conduct of the election without reference to any outside agency. There is no limitation in Article 324 (1) from which it can be held that where the law made under Article 327 or the relevant rules made thereunder do not provide for the mechanism of dealing with a certain extraordinary situation, the hands of the Election Commission are tied and it cannot in dependently decide for itself what to do in a matter relating to an election. The Election Commission is competent in an appropriate case to order repoll of an entire constituency where necessary. It will be an exercise of power within the ambit of its functions under Article 3234. The Petitioner filed a representation before the Election Commission which was disposed of as the Election Commission refused to interfere in the matter in question. Aggrieved by the said order of the Commission, the Petitioner has approached this Court.

(3.) IN this regard before proceeding further, it is necessary to peruse Article 329 of the Constitution which reads as under: