WP/35834/2019 of SENTHIL ARUMUGAM Vs The Chief Election Commissioner, on 30 December 2019

1. The Chief Election Commissioner Tamil Nadu State Election Commission, Vadapalani, Chennai – 106.

2. The Chief Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St George Chennai 600 009...Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India praying for issuance of a writ ofmandamus directing the first respondent not to announce theresults of Local Body election held on 27.12.2019 and30.12.2019 for 27 Districts for the posts of Panchayat WardMembers, Panchayat Presidents, Panchayat Union Councilors andDistrict Councilors held as per the Notification issued inTamil Nadu Government Gazette Extra Oridnary No.455 [Part VI,Section – 2] dated 09.12.2019 till Urban Local Body Electionscompleted.

O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by S.VAIDYANATHAN, J. &P.T.ASHA, J.)

(1) By consent, the writ petition is taken up for finaldisposal. Mr.Ar.L.Sundaresan, learned Senior counselassisted by Mr.B.Nedunchezhiyan, learned counsel acceptsnotice on behalf of the 1[st] respondent and Mr.S.R.Rajagopal,learned Additional Advocate General and Mrs.Narmadhahttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/Sampath, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayan, learned Government Pleader acceptsnotice on behalf of the 2[nd] respondent.

(2) The petitioner submitted that the Local Body Elections arescheduled on 27.12.2019 and 30.12.2019 respectively for theposts of Panchayat Ward Members, Panchayat Presidents,Panchayat Union Councilors and District Councilors and that,the election has already been conducted on 27.12.2019 and itis being conducted today pursuant to the orders of theHon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 06.12.2019 made in WritPetition [Civil] No.1443/2019 [S.Shankar V. The ElectionCommission of India]. (3)Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for thepetitioner ; Mr.Ar.L.Sundaresan, learned Senior counselassisted by Mr.B.Nedunchezhiyan, learned counsel appearingfor the 1[st]respondent and Mr.S.R.Rajagopal, learnedAdditional Advocate General and Mrs.Narmadha Sampath,learnedAdditionalAdvocateGeneralassistedbyMr.V.Jayaprakash Narayan, learned Government Pleaderappearing for the 2[nd] respondent and also perused thematerials placed before it.

(4) It is relevant to extract Paragraph No.15 of the order ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 06.12.2019 in WP.[C] No.1443/2019:-''15. For the reasons aforestated, theseapplications are allowed in part anddisposed of with the following directions:-(a)The Respondent-Authorities shall holdelections to all Panchayats at Village,intermediate and District Levels, exceptthose in the following nine reconstitutedDistricts.i.Kancheepuramii.Chengalpattuiii.Velloreiv.Thirupathurv.Ranipetvi.Villupuramvii.Kallakurichiviii.Tirunelveliix.Tenkasi(k)Therespondents[includingtheDelimitation Commission] are directed todelimit the nine newly constitutedDistricts in accordance with the law andthereafter, hold elections for theirpanchayats at the village, intermediateand District levels, within a period offour months.

(l) There shall be no legal impedimentagainst holding elections for panchayatsat the village, intermediate and Districtlevels for the rest of the Districts.(m)State Election Commission shall notifyelections for the panchayats at village,

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

intermediate and District levels inrespect of all Districts except the ninere-constituted Districts as per thedetails given in direction ''a'' above.;(n)Whileconductingelections,therespondents shall provide proportionatereservation at all levels, in accordancewith the Rule 6 of the Tamil NaduPanchayats [Reservation of Seats andRotation of Reserved Seats] Rules, 1995.''

(5) The only grievance expressed by the petitioner is that theresults of the elections conducted in the rural areas willhave a bearing on the elections that may be conducted in theurban areas and that it is a transitional stage and wouldfurther submit that, though the Local Body Election in therural areas could be conducted, the results of the same,shall not be declared for the aforesaid reason.

(6) When this Court posed a question as to whether the verysame persons are going to cast the vote, the learned counselfor the petitioner would submit that the persons who aregoing to cast their votes in the urban areas are differentand the said factum was also affirmed by the respectivelearned Additional Advocate Generals. It is also seen thatsimilar plea was also taken before the Hon'ble Apex Court inthe order cited supra [S.Shankar's case] and it is relevantto extract the same:- ''M. Because the respondent Commissionannounced the election only to Rural LocalBodies in a phased manner and has alsoannounced the date of counting of votes,without announcing the date for the electionof the Urban Local Bodies. Although thereis no bar to conduct the elections in aphased manner, declaration of results forsuch phases without conducting the electionfor Rural Local Bodies would impact theresults for the election to Urban Localbodies, to which elections are yet to beannounced.''

(7) Though the petitioner has referred to Article 243-Q of theConstitution of India, which reads thus:-243Q. Constitution of Municipalities.—(1)There shall be constituted in every State,—(a) a Nagar Panchayat (by whatever namecalled) for a transitional area, that is tosay, an area in transition from a rural areato an urban area;(b) a Municipal Council for a smaller urbanarea; and(c) a Municipal Corporation for a larger urbanarea, in accordance with the provisions ofthis Part:Provided that a Municipality under this clausehttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/may not be constituted in such urban area or part thereof as the Governor may, havingregard to the size of the area and themunicipal services being provided or proposedto be provided by an industrial establishmentin that area and such other factors as he maydeem fit, by public notification, specify tobe an industrial township.(2) In this article, “a transitional area”, “asmaller urban area” or “a larger urban area”means such area as the Governor may, havingregard to the population of the area, thedensity of the population therein, the revenuegenerated for local administration, thepercentage of employment in non-agriculturalactivities, the economic importance or suchother factors as he may deem fit, specify bypublic notification for the purposes of thisPart.''

it nowhere prohibits the election being conducted, moreparticularly, in the light of the order passed by the Hon'bleApex Court of India referred to above. That apart, there is aNotification dated 02.12.2019 published in the Tamil NaduGovernment Gazette Extra Oridnary No.455 [Part VI, Section –2] dated 09.12.2019 and this fact, having been brought to theknowledge of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Hon'ble SupremeCourt of India, taking note of the above did not deem it fitto keep at bay the declaration of the final results. If atall the petitioner has got any grievance after declaration ofthe results, it is open to him to challenge the same and thisCourt is of the considered view that it is too premature forthe petitioner to approach this Court seeking direction not todeclare the results of the election.

(8) In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed at theadmission stage itself, granting liberty to the petitioner,to challenge the results of the elections being conducted,if it is available to him under law. No costs.Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition isclosed.

AP

1. The Chief Election Commissioner Tamil Nadu State Election Commission, Vadapalani, Chennai – 106.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The Chief Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St George Chennai 600 009.+1cc to Mr.B.Nedunchezhiyan, Advocate, S.R.No. 106883+1cc to Mr.R.T.Chidambaram, Advocate, S.R.No. 106835+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No. 106886

WP.NO.35834/2019MJ(CO)GN(30/12/2019)