Fresh Poll Not Needed When Election With 2 Candidates Set Aside, Runner-Up Be Declared Winner : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that where only two candidates contested an election, setting aside the winning candidate's election does not warrant a fresh poll; instead, the runner-up should be declared elected.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta set aside the Odisha High Court's decision to direct a fresh election, after the winning candidate's election as Panchayat Samiti Chairperson was declared null and void.

The dispute arose from the 2022 election to the post of Chairperson of the Delang Panchayat Samiti in Odisha, where the appellant and the respondent were the only two contestants. The respondent was declared elected.

The appellant challenged the election under Section 45(1)(v) of the Orissa Panchayat Samiti Act, 1959, alleging that the returned candidate stood disqualified for having a third child beyond the statutory cut-off date.

The Election Tribunal allowed the petition, holding that the disqualification was proved based on uncontroverted evidence. It declared the respondent's election void and, invoking Section 44-J(2)(b) of the Orissa Panchayat Samiti Act, 1959, declared the appellant as the duly elected Chairperson, being the only other candidate in the fray.

However, the Appellate Tribunal and subsequently the High Court upheld the disqualification but set aside the declaration in favour of the appellant, directing a fresh election, prompting the Appellant-runner candidate to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Setting aside the impugned decision, the judgment authored by Justice Mehta emphasized that the Appellate Tribunal and High Court erred in directing the fresh polls, given the fact that only two candidates had filed nominations in the election.

Rejecting the reasoning of the Appellate Tribunal and High Court, the bench observed that giving an opportunity to other members to contest was legally untenable, as the election had already been conducted between specific candidates.

“The Election Appellate Tribunal fell into clear error in reversing the said declaration on the premise that other members of the Delang Panchayat Samiti should be given an opportunity to contest for the post of Chairman. The High Court too, erred in affirming the judgment of the Election Appellate Tribunal to that extent.”, the court said.

“…it may be noted that, for election to the post of Chairman of the Delang Panchayat Samiti, only the appellant-election petitioner and the respondent-returned candidate had contested and hence setting aside of the declaration issued by the Election Tribunal in favour of the appellant-election petitioner on the premise that an opportunity should be given to other members of the Delang Panchayat Samiti, was wholly unwarranted and uncalled for.”, the court held.

Accordingly, the election tribunal's decision was restored, and the Appellant was declared elected as Chairperson.

The appeal was allowed.

Cause Title: RAMADEBI RAUTRAY VERSUS STATE OF ODISHA AND ORS. (and connected case)

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 260

Click here to download judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Kedar Nath Tripathy, AOR Mr. Aditya Narayan Tripathy, Adv. Mr. Umakant Misra, Adv. Mr. Tushar Garg, AOR Ms. Prabhati Nayak, Adv. Mr. Debabrata Dash, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :