“Can't Compel People To Vote”: Madras HC Dismisses Plea Seeking To Make Proof Of Voting Mandatory For Availing Paid Leave On Poll Day

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that though every person had a duty to cast a vote, no one could compel a person to vote if he chose not to exercise his right.

The court was hearing a plea by Advocate Ramkumar Adityan. Adityan had sought directions to the Ministry of Personnel and Training, Labour Welfare & Skill Development Department, and the Chief Election Commissioner to make it mandatory to submit necessary proof of voting to avail of paid holiday on the poll day if the employee was a voter in the constituency where a general or bye-election was to be held.

Adityan argued that the right to vote was a constitutional right guaranteed to every citizen who had attained a majority and was not otherwise disqualified. He further submitted that Section 135B was added to the Representation of People Act to ensure that the voters were not kept from exercising their right and voting on the poll day for reasons of work. According to Section 135B of the Act, every employee entitled to vote was to be granted a holiday for voting and no deduction or abatement of wages was to be made on account of his absence.

He further submitted that similar provisions existed in the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act 1994 and the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act 1920. Further office memorandum has also been brought in by the Ministry directing the establishments to be closed on days when the Lok Sabha elections are to be conducted. The office memorandum also provides for granting special leave to a voter who might have registered in another constituency and residing in a different constituency.

Pointing to the voter turnouts in the previous elections, Adityan argued that almost all Urban and Semi-Urban regions have recorded low polling. Adityan submitted that laziness, heat, lack of good candidates, and missing names from the voters' list were some of the reasons for the low polling. He thus argued that there was a need to improve the poll percentage.

Adityan submitted that while there is a duty on the establishments to grant paid holidays on the day of elections, there was no mechanism to check whether the employees were exercising their franchise. He thus argued that to ensure voting, the establishment was entitled to insist on necessary proof in order to ensure that the statutory benefit was not mis-utilised.

Thus, he had moved the petition seeking directions. The court, however, said that it could not grant any relief and dismissed the plea.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 128

Case Title: B Ramkumar Adityan v Secretary and Others

Case No: WP No. 7655 of 2024