Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Feb 13, 2002

About Us
Contact Us
Front Page
News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Front Page

SC stays HC order on U.P. polls
By Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI, FEB. 12. The Supreme Court today stayed an order of the Allahabad High Court passed on February 11 permitting an elector, whose name is found in the voters' list, to vote in the polls in Uttar Pradesh even without the `photo identify card' or any one of the 18 identity documents specified by the Election Commission.

A three-judge Bench comprising Justice B.N. Kirpal, Justice Shivaraj V. Patil and Justice B.P. Singh stayed the High Court order on a special leave petition preferred by the Election Commission seeking to set aside the order.

The Bench observed that photo identity and 18 other alternative identity documents as notified by the Election Commission on January 23 and February 7 would come into operation and those alone would be given effect to by all the Returning Officers as well as the Presiding Officers during the three-phase polling scheduled for February 14, 18 and 21.

The Bench said its order would be intimated to the Chief Electoral Officer in Uttar Pradesh, who would inform the Presiding Officers. The Bench also issued notices to the State Government and two petitioners who had filed Public Interest Litigation petitions in the High Court challenging the commission's order making the photo identity cards and any of the 18 other identity documents as a prerequisite for voting.

Passing orders on two PIL petitions, the High Court had held the Election Commission's notification specifying 18 identity documents in addition to the photo identity card which would enable a voter to cast his ballot should not be insisted upon.

The court had directed that an elector would be required to establish his/her identity only when it was challenged and if his/her name was found in the voters' list, he/she should be permitted to exercise his franchise.

Arguing for the commission, senior counsel K.K. Venugopal contended that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction and the order had put the commission in an awkward position.

Later, the official spokesperson of the commission, A.N. Jha, said following the stay granted by the apex court, the notifications of January 23 and February 7 would be restored.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |

Copyright © 2002, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu