Azad Bharat Congress v. Election Commission of India

1. The present petition has be^nrfflfejdvly the petitioner, apolitical party registered under the Representation of febjple Act, 1951, praying inter alia that the respondent/ECI be directed'to' allot it a common symbol for contesting the general electipn to the 'Legislative-^%em^^ in the State of Uttar Pradesh. •

2. On the last date of.hearihg,' ^-nb^^ present on behalf of respondent/ECI.

3. Today, Mr. Chopra, learned counsel appears for the respondent/ECI and states that vide letter dated 16.1.2017, the President ofthe petitioner was duly informed that the request for allotment of a common symbol cannot be acceded to as the symbol proposed by the petitioner is either allotted or a resembling symbol. Reference in the said letter has been made to para lOB of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotrnent) Order, 1968 (in short WP(C) 775/2017 Page 1 of[3] 2017:DHC:9004 'the Order'). A copy of the aforesaid letter is handed over by counsel for the respondent, with copy furnished to counsel for the petitioner and taken on record.

4. Counsel for the respondent/ECI submits that the aforesaid Rule envisages that the intention to contest an election is to be givenby a party to the respondent/ECI at any time during the period commencing from the date of six months prior to the date of expiry of the term of the Assembly and latest by five clear days before the date on which the notification of the election is scheduled to be issued.. He submits that para lOB of the Order states that no proposal for a new symbol shall- be entertained by the Commission unless it is made at:least^three months before the date of expiry of the term of the Assembly of Uttar ^ which is 27:5.2017. In the the light of the aforesaid Ord#;;' tMf a^ of the petitioner for allotment of a symbol cannot be;entertained by the respondent/ECI as the date ofexpiry ofthe term ofthe Assemb^^i^Uttar Pradesh is'27.5.2017 and an application under Section, lOB of th|V^rSer-!Go.,t^^^^^^ made on or before 18.11.2016 and the timelineshaving already-exj]iir^d:ih present case, the request ofthe petitioner cannotll^enMtaiii^

5. Counsel for the petitioner states that after filing the present petition, his client has received a letter dated 16.1.2017 from the respondent/ECI with regard to concession to candidates set up by registered unrecognized political parties for allotment of common symbol under para lOB of the Order. He submits the name of the petitioner finds mention at Sr. No.25 of the aforesaid letter.

6. The said letter would not be of any assistance as it permits the petitioner to participate in the elections for the Legislative Assembly of -'•C •T - WP(C) 775/2017 Page 2 of[3] A Uttarakhand for the yeai- 2017 and not for the Legislative Assembly ofUttar Pradesh.

7. As a result, the prayer made in the petition is declined. The writ petition is dismissed.

FEBRUARY 02, 2017 sk V?;; 'y ^; X %' ? i." •'7 i'-,'..• --C' " •' HIMA KOHLI, J