Bye-Election Cannot Be Held If Remaining Assembly Term Falls Below One Year: Bombay HC Quashes ECI Notification For Ponda Bye-Election

The Bombay High Court has quashed the notification for the Ponda bye-election, observing that the expression “remainder of the term” under clause (a) of the proviso to Section 151-A of the Representation of the People Act must be reckoned from the date of declaration of the result of the bye-election. The Court observed that if the remaining tenure from such date is less than one year, the statutory bar operates and a bye-election cannot be held.

A division bench of Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit S. Jamsandekar was hearing writ petitions challenging the notification dated 16.03.2026 issued by the Election Commission of India for conducting bye-election to the 21-Ponda Assembly Constituency in Goa. The term of the Assembly will end on 14.03.2027. The sitting MLA passed away on 15.10.2025, creating a vacancy. The Election Commission issued the impugned notification within six months, fixing polling on 09.04.2026 and declaration of results on 04.05.2026. The petitioners contended that the remainder of the term available to the incoming member would be less than one year and thus the bye-election was barred, whereas the Election Commission argued that the period should be reckoned differently and sought reference to a larger bench.

The Court examined the scheme of Section 151-A of the Act, noting that while the main provision mandates that a bye-election be held within six months of the occurrence of a vacancy, clause (a) of the proviso creates a bar where the remainder of the term is less than one year. It considered the interpretation placed by a coordinate bench in Sandeep Yashwantrao Sarode v/s Election Commission of New Delhi & Ors. [2019 SCC OnLine Bom 629] and held that the said interpretation, which reckons the remaining term from the date of declaration of the result of the bye-election, is a binding precedent.

The Court rejected the contention of the Election Commission that the earlier decision required reconsideration or reference to a larger bench. It held that there was no conflicting judgment of coordinate benches and that the decision in Pramod Laxman Gaudadhe [2018 SCC OnLine Bom 1111] did not lay down any binding ratio on the interpretation of clause (a), as it was decided on its own facts.

Applying the said interpretation to the facts of the present case, the Court noted that the results of the bye-election were scheduled to be declared on 04.05.2026, and the term of the Assembly would end on 14.03.2027. It found that the remaining tenure available to the incoming member would be less than one year.

In view of this, the Court held that the impugned notification was issued in contravention of clause (a) of the proviso to Section 151-A and was therefore unsustainable.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petitions, quashed and set aside the notification dated 16.03.2026 issued by the Election Commission of India for conducting the bye-election to the 21-Ponda Assembly Constituency, and declared that the proposed bye-election could not be held in view of the statutory bar.

Case Title: Pritam Harmalkar vs. Election Commission of India & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 235 of 2026 & Writ Petition No. 237 of 2026]

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 177

Click Here To Read/Download Order