Live
- Chanchalguda Jail Officials Say They Haven't Received Bail Papers Yet, Allu Arjun May Stay in Jail Tonight
- BJP leaders present evidence of illegal voters in Delhi, urge EC for swift action
- Exams will not be cancelled: BPSC chairman
- Nagesh Trophy: Karnataka, T.N win in Group A; Bihar, Rajasthan triumph in Group B
- YS Jagan condemns the arrest of Allu Arjun
- Economic and digital corridors to maritime connectivity, India and Italy building vision for future, says Italian Ambassador
- SMAT 2024: Patidar's heroics guide Madhya Pradesh to final after 13 years
- CCPA issues notices to 17 entities for violating direct selling rules
- Mamata expresses satisfaction over speedy conviction in minor girl rape-murder case
- Transparent Survey Process for Indiramma Housing Scheme Directed by District Collector
HC seeks CEO’s stance on polls
HC seeks CEO’s stance on polls, Pamarru MLA D Y Das, Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sen Gupta. The High Court Bench was dealing with a writ petition filed by Pamarru MLA D Y Das from Krishna district questioning the validity of the Section 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014.
Centre also asked to file its response in two weeks
Pamarru MLA D Y Das contends the Constitution does not envisage a scenario of persons being elected to an Assembly being allotted to another State. The court will hear the version of EC in the matter today
Hyderabad: A Division Bench of the AP High court comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sen Gupta and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar on Wednesday made it clear that the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Andhra Pradesh should be present in the court on Thursday or effectively represent its stance in a writ petition seeking stay on the conduct of elections to the State Assembly.
The High Court Bench was dealing with a writ petition filed by Pamarru MLA D Y Das from Krishna district questioning the validity of the Section 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014.
The Act which provides for the new States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, the petitioner pointed out, provides for allotment of a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly of the united State to the State of Telangana as unconstitutional and in violation of Article 13 of the Constitution.
It is contended that the very conduct of elections and then allotment of legislators is not provided for under the Constitution.
HC seeks CEO’s stance on polls
The petitioner sought a declaration that the action of the respondents in proceeding to conduct elections to the Assembly after the advent of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014 and notification of the Appointed Date as June 2 – when the State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh would come into existence – as illegal and unconstitutional. He urged the court to prevent the respondents to forbear from conducting election to the Assembly.
The Bench wanted the Election Commission to respond on the notice and adjourned the matter to Thursday.
Senior counsel Vedula Venkataramana, the counsel for the petitioner, pointed out that the life of every legislature, unless sooner determined, shall be for a period of five years, and for such Assembly only elections should be conducted. He pointed out that under the changed circumstances, the life of the Assembly, for which elections are being held, is pre-determined and less than the period mentioned in the Constitution. He said that the Constitution does not envisage a scenario of persons being elected to an Assembly being allotted to another State.
This is constitutionally not perceived and thus unconstitutional, he said. The Senior Counsel also argued that the election notification would be issued by the election commission by April 2 and by the operation of law the subject would be barred from judicial scrutiny. He pointed out that the very process of holding election to the old composite state in light of the formation of the new state was not in accordance with the constitution and led to a legal fiction not provided for under the constitution.
The bench is scheduled to hear the Election Commission on the matter on Thursday. Vishnu Vardhan Reddy Assistant Solicitor General informed the court that the Central government would file its response in two weeks as the matter related to challenge of a legislation.
