SC to hear DMK plea on delimitation of wards

October 01, 2016 12:00 am | Updated November 01, 2016 10:15 pm IST - NEW DELHI:

Petition also seeks Supreme Court direction for compulsory usage of EVMs and appointment of observers and poll officers from Central govt. departments.

The local body polls will be held on October 17 and 19.

The local body polls will be held on October 17 and 19.

The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear a petition filed by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam challenging the Madras High Court's refusal to declare as unconstitutional two Tamil Nadu municipal laws to enable the delimitation of wards and reservation of seats in urban and local bodies election in 2016 according to the 2011 census.

The petition also sought the Supreme Court to direct the State government to take steps for compulsory usage of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and appoint observers and poll officers from Central government departments in furtherance of constitutional mandate of free and fair elections.

A Bench, led by Justice Ranjan Gogoi, scheduled the case for hearing on October 6. The petition, filed by advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, arraigns the Governor's Secretariat and the Tamil Nadu government as the main opposite parties along with others.

The petition said the Madras High Court refused the pleas in its September 21 order without any reasons whatsoever for the rejection.

The Supreme Court will now take a fresh look on whether the Tamil Nadu Municipal Laws (2ndAmendment) Act, 2016 and Tamil Nadu (2ndAmendment) Act, 2016 are ultravires the Constitution.

“The High Court agreed with the petitioner that not carrying out the delimitation of wards based on the census of 2011 is not proper and the same is contrary to the constitutional guarantee as provided to the citizens... The court held that it is merely a procedural irregularity and does not go into the root of election,” the petition contended.

Similarly, the petition contended that the High court had accepted the contention of the petitioner that EVMs are a more effective method of representing people’s actual mandate, but refused to direct them to be made mandatory.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.