Court scraps plea seeking to void 2024 Maharashtra polls: Abuse of process of law
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed a writ petition filed by a voter seeking to declare the upcoming November 2024 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly elections null and void, terming it a "gross abuse of the process of law."A division bench comprising Justices GS Kulkarni and Arif Doctor upheld the objections raised by the Election Commission of India (ECI), stating, "Such objections are valid and would persuade us to summarily dismiss this petition on the ground that the petition amounts to a gross abuse of the process of law."advertisementThe petition was filed by Chetan Ahire, a voter from the Vikhroli constituency, who alleged large-scale procedural irregularities and illegal voting after the official polling deadline of 6 pm.
Ahire, represented by advocate and Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi chief Prakash Ambedkar, claimed that more than 76 lakh votes - 6.8 percent of the total-were cast after the deadline without proper records or ECI oversight.However, the court ruled that Ahire lacked the legal standing to challenge the outcome of the entire state election, particularly in the absence of a valid election petition under the Representation of the People Act.The bench observed that the petition relied solely on third-party information obtained through the Right to Information (RTI) Act and on speculative claims based on a newspaper article. It also noted that Ahire had made no prior representation or demand for redressal before the ECI.advertisement"There is not a scratch of legal injury suffered by the petitioner," the court said, adding that he had no locus standi to challenge elections across all 288 constituencies based on vague and unsupported allegations.The court further declined to entertain Ahire's plea to scrap electronic voting machines (EVMs) and return to paper ballots, reiterating the Supreme Court's position that EVMs are legally valid and essential for conducting efficient elections.- EndsMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
Governor nod to in-charge VCs to start faculty recruitment process
1 2 Bhubaneswar: Governor Hari Babu Kambhampati, who is also chancellor of state universities, has allowed in-charge vice-chancellors or VCs on extension to undertake statutory activities, including the initial process of faculty recruitment and VC selection. In a notification issued recently — accessed by TOI — the office of the chancellor has given power to in-charge VCs and VCs on extension to conduct restructuring and reservation finalisation, issuing advertisements for the recruitment of faculty, formation of selection committees, scrutiny of documents, and formation of authorities including the syndicate, senate, academic council and finance committee. They are also responsible for nominating members for the VC selection committee. The notification stated the arrangement is a one-time measure, in the exercise of the chancellor's powers conferred by sub-section (9) of Section 5 of the Odisha Universities Act, 1989. The sub-section states, "The chancellor shall be competent to issue directions or instructions not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act and statutes on any matter connected with a university when any authority or vice-chancellor fails to act in accordance with the provisions of this Act, statutes or the regulations. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo " A higher education department official said there was confusion regarding the commencement of faculty recruitment process due to lack of permanent VCs. "Permanent VCs should start the process of faculty recruitment, but now the chancellor has made the process easy. The in-charge VCs can start the process," he added. According to the Odisha Universities Amendment Act, 2024, a selection committee will be formed by following UGC guidelines to recruit faculty members . The committee will be chaired by the VC of the university or his/her nominee. The committee will include an academic not below the rank of professor nominated by the chancellor. It will have three subject experts selected by the VC from a panel of names recommended by the syndicate. Others will include the dean of faculty or head of the department, along with an academic from ST/SC/OBC/women/minority/PWD category as per the candidate present, to be nominated by the VC. Four members shall constitute a quorum, in which two subject expert members and one academic nominated by the chancellor are a must.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Bombay High Court questions legal basis of stipend for junior lawyers
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday (June 25, 2025) raised questions over whether junior lawyers in Maharashtra have a statutory right to receive a monthly stipend, even as it expressed sympathy for their financial struggles. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by twelve junior advocates from Maharashtra seeking a monthly stipend of ₹5,000 for junior lawyers with less than three years of practice and an annual income under ₹1 lakh. While acknowledging the financial hardship faced by junior lawyers, the Court questioned the legal basis for mandating a stipend. 'What is the statutory right? On a personal level, we support you. We agree with you. But principally, who will give this? Bar Council has no funds. Will you give any funds?' Chief Justice Aradhe asked. He further queried whether the demand served a broader public interest: 'There is no element of public interest in this. How is society in general concerned with stipend to young lawyers?' The petitioners, represented by advocates Ajit Deshpande and Akshay Desai, argued that the stipend would provide crucial financial assistance during the formative years of legal practice, particularly for those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. They cited similar stipend schemes implemented in other states including Delhi, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Jharkhand, and Andhra Pradesh, and pointed to a Bar Council of India (BCI) recommendation for stipends of ₹15,000 in rural areas and ₹20,000 in urban regions. When the petitioners pointed out that the Delhi High Court had already passed directions in this regard, Chief Justice Aradhe replied, 'Why just ₹15,000? We believe that in cities like Mumbai, ₹45,000 should be paid. But where will the funds come from?' The Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG), in its response, stated that implementing the scheme would cost approximately ₹155 crore annually — an amount it claimed it cannot afford without state support. The BCMG counsel said, 'Certain states that have these schemes are aided. We can't do that in Maharashtra. We had sent a representation.' The Court adjourned the matter for two weeks and directed the parties to return with clarity on whether any statutory provision requires such financial aid for junior lawyers. The petition also proposes that the Maharashtra Advocates Welfare Fund be used to finance the scheme. Filed in 2022, the petition argues for the creation of a permanent stipend scheme to support young advocates through the early, financially unstable years of legal practice. The petition said, 'A survey conducted by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy claims that more than 79% of surveyed lawyers across 7 High Courts said that advocates with less than 2 years of legal practice at the Bar earn less than ₹10,000 a month. The survey also showed the disparity in incomes of senior advocates and the entrance of the profession. This reflects the need of the hour to support young lawyers who have not been in a position to sustain themselves.' It also said that the State Government of Maharashtra has not taken any steps to economically support the new lawyers and to give economic aid to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa. 'On March 24, 2020, the Bar Council of India appealed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to provide ₹20,000 as a minimum subsistence allowance per month to lawyers who are not financially well off so that they can support their families following the lockdown. But unfortunately, no economic support has been provided by the Central Government,' the petition said.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
HC junks plea alleging ‘vote fraud' in assembly elections
Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Wednesday rejected a petition to declare the state assembly elections null and void due to 76 lakh bogus votes allegedly cast after the closing of polls at 6 pm on Nov 20 last year. "There is nothing on record that at any polling station in the state of Maharashtra, any untoward incident or fraud took place. We, hence, fail to discern how, in the absence of any tangible material acceptable in law, which also needs to be booth-wise, there was any fraudulent voting," said Bombay HC Justices Girish Kulkarni and Arif Doctor. Petitioner Chetan Ahire, a voter from the Vikhroli constituency, based his petition on an RTI reply obtained by Delhi resident Venkatesh Nayak from the Election Commission of India that "there is no data available about these votes with the ECI." Ahire said these votes cannot be considered in declaring the results. You Can Also Check: Mumbai AQI | Weather in Mumbai | Bank Holidays in Mumbai | Public Holidays in Mumbai Senior advocate Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, for the EC, and the Centre's advocate Uday Warunjikar urged the dismissal of the petition as it amounts to "gross abuse of the process of law." "We wonder how the petitioner can have a locus standi to seek such wide, sweeping, and drastic reliefs to question the entire elections of the State Legislative Assembly. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Get Affordable Health Coverage Today Search7 Learn More Undo It is a relief, too far-fetched, that too on the basis of no cause of action," the judges noted. They said that this is more particularly in the context of the constitutional and statutory bar that no election to either House of a state legislature shall be called into question, except by an election petition. Such a petition is maintainable at the behest of a voter or a contesting candidate. Ahire, "having failed to demonstrate a legal injury, the sequel is automatically the lack of the petitioner's locus to maintain the writ petition. " The judges viewed Ahire's advocate Prakash Ambedkar's submission that the conduct of the election violated the basic structure of the Constitution and breached Ahire's fundamental rights as "wholly without foundation." The judges said that although farcical claims are made on the purity of the process of the state assembly elections, and more particularly in the context of the EVMs and a need to replace them with ballot papers, "such plea of the petitioner appears to be in absolute desperation." The use of EVMs was held to be legal and valid by the Supreme Court, the HC said.
