Mere Allegations of Harassment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Wife in Matrimonial Suicide Case 'Convenience Of Wife Not A Thumb Rule, But Custody Of Minor Child Is A Weighing Aspect': Punjab & Haryana HC Transfers Divorce Case To Rohtak MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Cooperative Society Is A “Veritable Party” To Arbitration Clause In Flat Agreements, Temple Trust Entitled To Arbitrate As Non-Signatory: Bombay High Court State Government Cannot Review Its Own Revisional Orders Under Section 41(3): Allahabad High Court Affirms Legal Bar on Successive Reviews When Several Issues Arise, Courts Must Answer Each With Reasons: Supreme Court Automatic Retention Trumps Lessee Tag: Calcutta High Court Declares Saregama India ‘Raiyat’, Directs Reconsideration of Land Conversion Application Recovery of Valid Ticket Raises Presumption of Bona Fide Travel – Burden Shifts to Railways: Delhi High Court Restores Railway Accident Claim Failure to Frame Issue on Limitation Vitiates Award of Compensation Under Telegraph Act: Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Order, Remands Matter Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Heritable Right: Gujarat High Court Rejects 9-Year Delayed Claim, Orders Re-Issuance of ₹4 Lakh Compensation Court Cannot Rewrite Contracts to Suit Contractor’s Convenience: Kerala High Court Upholds Termination of Road Work Under Risk and Cost Clause Post-Bail Conduct Is Irrelevant in Appeal Against Grant of Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Crucial Distinction Between Appeal and Cancellation Granting Anticipatory Bail to a Long-Absconding Accused Makes a Mockery of the Judicial Process: Supreme Court Cracks Down on Pre-Arrest Bail in Murder Case Recognition as an Intangible Asset Does Not Confer Ownership: Supreme Court Draws a Sharp Line Between Accounting Entries and Property Rights IBC Cannot Be the Guiding Principle for Restructuring the Ownership and Control of Spectrum: Supreme Court Reasserts Public Trust Over Natural Resources Courts Cannot Convict First and Search for Law Later: Supreme Court Faults Prosecution for Ignoring Statutory Foundation in Cement Case When the Law Itself Stood Withdrawn, How Could Its Violation Survive?: Supreme Court Quashes 1994 Cement Conviction Under E.C. Act Ten Years Means Ten Years – Not a Day Less: Supreme Court Refuses to Dilute Statutory Experience Requirement for SET Exemption SET in Malayalam Cannot Qualify You to Teach Economics: Supreme Court Upholds Subject-Specific Eligibility for HSST Appointments Outsourcing Cannot Become A Tool To Defeat Regularization: Supreme Court On Perennial Nature Of Government Work Once Similarly Placed Workers Were Regularized, Denial to Others Is Discrimination: Supreme Court Directs Regularization of Income Tax Daily-Wage Workers Right To Form Association Is Protected — But Not A Right To Run It Free From Regulation: Supreme Court Recalibrates Article 19 In Sports Governance S. Nithya Cannot Be Transplanted Into Cricket: Supreme Court Shields District Cricket Bodies From Judicially Imposed Structural Overhaul Will | Propounder Must Dispel Every Suspicious Circumstance — Failure Is Fatal: : Punjab & Haryana High Court Electronic Evidence Authenticity Jeopardized by Unexplained Delay and Procedural Omissions: MP High Court Rejects Belated 65B Application Not Answering to the Questions of the IO Would Not Ipso Facto Mean There Is Non-Cooperation: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Undertaking to Satisfy Award Is Not Waiver of Appeal: Supreme Court Restores Insurer’s Statutory Right

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