SC to hear YSRCP plea against HC order refusing extension of nomination deadline

New Delhi: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear, on Wednesday, a plea filed by the YSRCP challenging an Andhra Pradesh High Court order refusing to extend the deadline for filing nominations for the state's Urban Local Body elections amid allegations of violence and obstruction of Opposition candidates.

As per the cause list published on the official website of the apex court, a Bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana will take up the matter for hearing on Wednesday at 10.30 a.m.

The Special Leave Petition (SLP), filed under Article 136 of the Constitution, challenges the High Court order dismissing an application seeking a one-day extension for receipt of nominations in view of alleged disruptions during the nomination process.

The YSRCP has contended that its candidates were prevented from filing nominations in several areas, including Punganur, Rayachoti, Kadapa and Tirupati, on October 16, the first day of the nomination process.

According to the petition, nomination papers of a party candidate in Kadapa were allegedly seized and torn, while several candidates in Tirupati were physically prevented from entering the rooms of the Returning Officers concerned.

It also alleged that party workers and an MP, P.V. Midhun Reddy, were attacked while travelling to file nomination papers.

The YSRCP had earlier approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court seeking directions for alternative nomination centres with adequate security, alleging that the failure to ensure safe and free filing of nominations violated constitutional provisions.

However, a single judge, on October 15, declined to grant the blanket relief sought by the party, while allowing individual candidates facing threats to approach the Election Officers concerned for permission to file nominations at alternative locations.

The YSRCP subsequently filed an appeal and sought an extension of the nomination deadline, submitting that the alleged obstruction had prevented its candidates from participating in the electoral process.

Dismissing the application on October 18, a Division Bench of the High Court observed that the time for filing nominations had expired and that any direction at that stage would amount to interference with the election process.

The High Court said the relief sought in the application went beyond the scope of the original writ petition.

It also observed that, in the absence of a copy of any rejection order passed by the State Election Commission on the party's representation, the justification for such rejection could not be examined.

It further observed that constitutional courts would be “loath to issue” directions after the expiry of the nomination deadline if doing so amounted to interference with the election process.

The main writ appeal has been listed before the High Court on October 26, while the election schedule provides for withdrawal of candidatures on October 21, polling on October 28 and counting of votes on October 30.

In its SLP filed before the Supreme Court, the YSRCP has contended that the principle of non-interference in elections is a rule of judicial restraint and not an absolute bar to directions facilitating the conduct of free and fair elections.

It has argued that the expiry of the nomination deadline, allegedly caused by obstruction, should not itself defeat the request for relief.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

IANS

[email protected]