Election Commission Adjudicative Functions of Election Commission

Summary

This video lecture delves into the adjudicative functions of the Election Commission of India, focusing on its role in deciding disputes related to political party symbols and advising on the disqualification of members in legislative bodies. The Election Commission exercises both judicial and quasi-judicial powers in these areas, guided by legal principles and natural justice. Key legal cases are referenced to demonstrate how the Commission resolves disputes and provides binding advice on disqualification. The video provides an insightful overview of these crucial functions, setting the stage for future discussions on the Commission's legislative roles.

Takeaways

• 😀 The Election Commission has adjudicative functions, including deciding election symbols and conducting inquiries into disqualifications.
• 😀 Adjudication refers to the power to resolve disputes, and the Election Commission exercises this authority in key areas.
• 😀 The Election Commission's power to allot election symbols is derived from Article 324 and the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
• 😀 The Election Commission adjudicates disputes related to the recognition of political parties and claims over election symbols.
• 😀 The Supreme Court in *APL Conference Shillong v. V.A. Shanga* (1977) confirmed that the Election Commission exercises judicial powers when resolving disputes.
• 😀 The Election Commission acts as a quasi-judicial body when adjudicating disputes and has a duty to act impartially.
• 😀 The Election Commission advises the President or Governor on disqualification matters, as outlined in Articles 103(2) and 192(2) of the Constitution.
• 😀 In *Brundaban Nyak v. Election Commission of India* (1965), the Supreme Court held that the President or Governor must act according to the Election Commission's opinion on disqualification matters.
• 😀 The Election Commission must follow the principles of natural justice when adjudicating disqualification cases, including the rule against bias.
• 😀 In *Election Commission of India v. Dr. Subramanian Swamy* (1996), the Supreme Court ruled that the Chief Election Commissioner must recuse himself if there is suspicion of bias, ensuring fair and impartial decision-making.

Q & A

What is the primary function of the Election Commission of India in terms of adjudication?

The Election Commission of India primarily exercises adjudicative functions in two areas: deciding on election symbols for political parties and conducting inquiries into the disqualification of elected representatives.

How does the Election Commission resolve disputes related to political party symbols?

Under Article 324 of the Indian Constitution and the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order of 1968, the Election Commission has the authority to allot symbols to political parties and resolve disputes regarding the recognition of political parties and the allotment of symbols.

What did the Supreme Court state in *APL Conference Shillong vs VA Shanga* (1977) about the Election Commission’s adjudicative role?

In this case, the Supreme Court held that when the Election Commission resolves a dispute between two parties, it exercises a part of the state's judicial power, acting as a tribunal and must follow judicial procedures.

What are the powers of the Election Commission in relation to disqualification cases?

The Election Commission has the power to advise the President or the Governor on disqualification matters for Members of Parliament or State Legislatures. The President or Governor must act according to the Election Commission’s opinion.

Which articles of the Constitution empower the Election Commission to handle disqualification matters?

Articles 103(2) and 192(2) of the Indian Constitution give the President and Governors the authority to refer disqualification cases to the Election Commission for its inquiry and opinion.

What does the Supreme Court ruling in *Brundaban Nyak vs Election Commission of India* (1965) indicate about the Election Commission’s role in disqualification cases?

The ruling clarified that the President or Governor has no discretion in disqualification matters and must act according to the Election Commission's opinion, reinforcing the Commission’s quasi-judicial role.

What is meant by the Election Commission acting in a 'quasi-judicial' capacity?

When the Election Commission handles disqualification matters, it operates in a quasi-judicial capacity, meaning it follows judicial procedures and principles of natural justice, such as impartiality and fairness.

What principle of natural justice was highlighted in *Election Commission of India vs Dr. Subramanian Swamy* (1996)?

The case highlighted the principle of impartiality, where the Chief Election Commissioner recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest. The remaining members of the Commission were required to decide the case, ensuring fairness in the process.

Why was the Chief Election Commissioner required to recuse himself in the case of *Dr. Subramanian Swamy vs J. Jayalalitha*?

The Chief Election Commissioner, Shri T.N. Sheshan, had a professional connection with Dr. Subramanian Swamy’s lawyer, leading to a suspicion of bias. To maintain impartiality, he recused himself from the decision-making process.

What happens if the two members of the Election Commission disagree on a disqualification case?

If the two remaining members of the Election Commission are unable to reach a unanimous decision, the Chief Election Commissioner must provide his opinion, based on necessity, to finalize the decision.