The Calcutta High Court recently declined to issue directives for extending the nomination filing deadline in the upcoming West Bengal panchayat polls.
The bench comprising Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya stated that the State Election Commission (SEC) is an independent and capable authority, empowered by the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973, to modify dates other than the polling and results dates.
The court clarified that if any changes were required for the polling dates, the SEC must provide reasons and refer the matter to the State government. The government, upon being satisfied with the reasons, can then revoke the initial election dates notification.
“However, for extending dates other than the polling date, the discretion lies with the SEC. It being an independent body, it is competent to do so. Therefore, we leave it to the discretion of the SEC, to extend the dates, if it deems it fit,” the bench stated.
Furthermore, the bench rejected the appointment of a retired High Court judge as an “observer” for the panchayat polls.
The court took note of the report submitted by the State Election Commission (SEC), which indicated that senior officers from the West Bengal Civil Services and the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) have already been appointed as observers for the forthcoming elections scheduled to take place next month.
The bench said, “We are sure that the senior officers are bound to act in due diligence and for the purpose for which they are appointed as observers. Mandate of the election commission is to have free and fair elections, maintain its purity. Decisions of the commission, based on expert legal opinion, cannot be interfered with by this court in a routine manner. Therefore, senior officers of West Bengal Civil Services and IAS officers would ensure free and fair elections and maintain its purity. Thus, we don’t see any reason for appointing a retired judge as an observer”.
Regarding the plea for the deployment of paramilitary forces, the division bench directed the State Election Commission (SEC) to promptly request central forces and deploy them, particularly in the constituencies that have been identified as “sensitive” by the polling body.
“Going by pass incidents when the courts had to intervene on more than 12 occasions and order deployment of central forces or order central agencies to probe the violence incidents during polls or religious/political congregations, thus the State and SEC should and shall requisition central forces for the polls. Election commission must forthwith requisition central forces firstly for seats which are declared sensitive,” the bench emphasized.
The order was issued in response to two Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitions filed by Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, a leader of the Congress party, and Suvendu Adhikari, a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Both politicians approached the court to challenge the notification released by the State Election Commission (SEC) on June 9, which outlined the schedule for the three-tier Panchayat elections (Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti, and Zilla Parishad).
According to the notification, candidates were given a total of five days, until June 15, to submit their nomination papers.
The petitioners argued that the allocated time of five days would not be sufficient due to the presence of a Sunday in between and the fact that officials accepting nomination forms work only until 3 pm. They further contended that with over 3.65 lakh candidates contesting nearly 75,000 seats, the provided duration of five days would not be adequate.
In addition to the aforementioned concerns, the petitions also requested the deployment of central forces, installation of CCTV cameras, and implementation of other preventive measures to ensure that no incidents of violence occur during the polls.
The petitions highlighted that several block offices, where candidates are supposed to submit their nominations, have been allegedly taken over by workers of the ruling Trinamool Congress party. This, according to the petitions, poses a risk to the safety and well-being of candidates who wish to contest in the elections.
Therefore, the petitioners sought permission to submit their nomination papers online or directly to the respective District Magistrates, as an alternative to the traditional submission at block offices.
In response, the Court emphasized the need for the State to develop a feasible plan for the installation of CCTV cameras at polling stations across the region.
The court clarified, “Both the State and the SEC has to ensure that no polling station escapes such survillance. Also, places where it is technically difficult for installing CCTVs, the authorities will have to ensure that the entire process is videographed.”
Additionally, the division bench rejected the plea to allow candidates to file their nomination forms online or submit them directly to the District Magistrate.
Furthermore, the bench directed the State Election Commission (SEC) to ensure that contractual workers, civic volunteers, and even NCC (National Cadet Corps) personnel are not assigned tasks beyond what is legally permissible.
Regarding the protection of government servants who will be deployed for election duties, the Court assured that the presence of paramilitary forces would ensure the safety and security of the polling officers.
The bench made it clear that, “Where central forces aren’t deployed it would be the duty of the State Police to protect their lives. This direction must be implemented in letter and spirit without giving any room for laxity.”
