General Knowledge - Indian Politics - Discussion

Prior to 1966 election petitions were presented to the Election Commission, which would constitute one-member Election Tribunals of the rank of District Judge, on an ad hoc basis for the trial of election petitions. In Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Ahmed Isheque it was held by the Supreme Court that Art 329(b) prohibited only the 'initiation' of proceedings, questioning an election, in any other manner other than by an election petition and once that proceeding was initiated by filing an election petition, the requirement of Art 329(b) was met and thereafter the trial of the petition by the election tribunal was subject to the general law and to the supervision of High Courts over tribunals.

Thus in order to avoid dual jurisdiction over the election matters the Election Commission recommended that trial of election petitions should be entrusted to the High Courts instead of election tribunals. Parliament thus enacted Section 80-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 providing that the "High Court" shall be the authority for presentment of election petitions under Article 329(b) of the Constitution. This was incorporated by an amendment in the year 1966 (Act 47 of 1966).

As far as my knowledge goes the power to decide an election petition is vested with Supreme Court. There have been instance of the Apex Court giving verdict related to electoral issues like when PA Sangama raised the matter that the presidential elections were rigged.

The SC was the one which called the shots and likewise when eminent lawyer Prashant Bhushan had filed a petition for electoral reforms to bring in NOTA in EVMS in that case too supreme court gave the verdict.

Any elector or candidate can file an election petition if he or she thinks there has been malpractice during the election. An election petition is not an ordinary civil suit, but treated as a contest in which the whole constituency is involved. Election petitions are tried by the High Court of the State involved, and if upheld can even lead to the restaging of the election in that constituency.

High court is the correct answer because we take our first appeal in Hight Court. Hight Court is in every state which knows everything about its state so the power of election petition have Hight Court and Supreme Court is the court of our country, not state.

This is based on Section 80-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which provides that the High Court shall be the authority for the presentment of election petitions under Article 329 (b) of the Constitution.

Parliament has enacted Section 80-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 providing that the "High Court" shall be the authority for presentment of election petitions under Article 329 (b) of the Constitution.

The high court is supreme but in most cases the honorable high court refer such cases to Election commission. But in Presidential election matters the case has decided by the Supreme court.

Most of the powers within the state are vested with high court. It is easy for any person within the state to approach high court to address any grievance regarding elections.

If there has been any malpractice in election time, the candidate can file court it is not an opetition and submit in high court.

Of course Supreme court having more power than high court but high court having some special powers like an election petition.