Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court

Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection

27 September 2024 3:48 PM

By: sayum


Today, the Kerala High Court in WP(C) No. 26132 of 2024 upheld the disqualification of four members of East Eleri Grama Panchayat under the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999. The court ruled that the petitioners, who contested elections using the Revolutionary Marxist Party of India (RMPI)’s symbol, were rightly disqualified by the Kerala State Election Commission for defying a party directive and supporting a rival candidate.

The case originated after the 2020 General Election to Local Self-Government Institutions in Kerala, where the petitioners contested as candidates in East Eleri Grama Panchayat using RMPI’s symbol, "Football." Following the election, the Indian National Congress (INC) and RMPI formed an alliance to elect a Panchayat President. However, the petitioners supported a rival candidate, violating the RMPI’s whip, leading to the Election Commission's disqualification order on July 2, 2024.

The primary legal issue was whether the petitioners were bound by RMPI's directives despite their claim of being independent candidates. The court examined whether the use of RMPI’s symbol made them members of the party, which subjected them to the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act.

The petitioners contended that they were independents under the Democratic Development Front (DDF), and the symbol "Football" was used merely out of convenience, not as RMPI members. However, the Election Commission determined that the petitioners were deemed RMPI members as they had used its symbol, supported by letters from RMPI’s State Secretary.

The High Court dismissed the petitioners' claims, holding that the use of RMPI's symbol placed them under the party’s purview. According to the Local Authorities Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 2017, when a political party recommends its symbol to a candidate, that candidate is "deemed to be set up by the political party"​.

Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. emphasized that the Election Commission’s finding was consistent with the law. The court ruled that the petitioners’ act of supporting a rival candidate despite RMPI's instructions amounted to voluntary defection, invoking disqualification under Section 3 of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act​.

The Kerala High Court validated the disqualification order by the Election Commission, reinforcing the principle that candidates who contest using a political party’s symbol are bound by its directives. The court's ruling underscores the stringent application of anti-defection laws in local body elections.

Date of Decision: September 26, 2024

Jiji Thomas and Others vs Kerala State Election Commission and Joseph Mutholi

 

Latest Legal News