With the Mayawati government refusing to provide information on the number of statues of elephants and Chief Minister Mayawati installed in parks/public places in the State, the Election Commission has moved the Supreme Court for a direction to the Uttar Pradesh government to furnish these details to decide the issue before it.
Directive
On a petition from advocate Ravi Kant alleging misuse of public funds for installation of these statues for self-glorification and to promote the party symbol of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), the Supreme Court had asked the Election Commission to pass appropriate orders on the petition.
However, when the Commission sought details, the State government replied that the Commission had no jurisdiction to seek such information when no election process was notified.
Government stand
The State government said that there was no provision under the Representation of the People Act and the Rules to call for such information as the Commission had no legal jurisdiction.
Assailing this stand, the Commission has approached the Supreme Court stating that in the absence of details as to where and in how many places/parks etc the statues of elephant and Ms. Mayawati had been installed, it could not verify the stand that the statues of elephant were not the replica of the party symbol.
BSP's contention
The BSP had contended that the elephant statues showed the trunk of elephant raised in welcome posture, whereas in the party symbol the trunk of the elephant was in lowered posture.
The Commission said the government had declined to provide basic factual information for discharge of its functions to decide the petitions and complaints filed under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order.
The information sought was integral to the discharge of its functions for arriving at a just and fair determination of the complaints filed by the petitioners and others.
Disputing the State's stand that the Commission had no jurisdiction, the petition submitted that the information sought was vital for deciding such disputes, during non-election period.
It sought a direction to the State government to supply the information called for by the Commission and to extend the time for passing appropriate orders in the petition.