Punjab State Election Commission Act | Person Is Not 'Ordinarily Resident' Only Because He Owns A House In The Constituency: High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court said that a person would not be an “ordinarily resident” in terms of Punjab Election Commission Act only on the ground of owning or possessing a house.The court said, “though the statutory coinage “ordinarily resident” has been statutorily conveyed the connotation, that any voter would not be “ordinarily resident” in a constituency or in any revenue estate concerned, thus merely on the ground that the he owns or is in possession of a dwelling house in that constituency/revenue estate.”The Court was hearing plea challenging order of State Election Commission whereby plea of the petitioner to consider him voter in a tehsil.Petitioner submitted thay he is the resident of Kua diary, tehsil patran, district patiala. His name was duly reflected in the voter list to this place only after the process of Delimitation. In 2018, objections were raised by the petitioner that some votes in kua diary actually belongs to Sahibzada Ajit singh nagar. By the order of the High court the official respondents were directed to decide the representation. On perusal of this, there votes were shown in Govindpura Pind in the assembly elections.Later, after wardbandi, he was shown in another ward of G.P Datul. On the order of SDM, the votes were transferred from G.P Datul to Shahibzada Ajit Nagar on the basis of Halka patwari report they were show as "ordinary resident" of that village.Appeal was filed against it which was dismissed by state election petition. The dismissal was challenged in this the High court vide which the same was remanded back to the state election commission (SEC) to consider the same on merits. SEC dismissed the same qua that the petitioner needs to approach the Electoral registration officer.Appeal Was filed against the same in the High court, the court ordered it to be decided within 4 week. Reports were submitted by the committee constituted by SEC vide which he was shown as the resident of Kua diary. The report was ignored and the impugned order of dismissal was passed. The plea was filed challenging the dismissal order.After hearing the submissions, the Court noted that It is not disputed that the private respondents were to be enlisted as voters as therebys they would exercising their franchise in the elections to be held to the respective democratic offices of the Gram Panchayat concerned, besides to enable them to exercise their franchise for electing their representative to the State Legislative Assembly and to their respresentative to the Union Parliament.The bench highlighted that, when an eligible voted is initially listed in a micro level constituency so he becomes endowed the privilege to exercise his right to vote in parliamentary and assembly elections. Thus, entitled to exercise franchise in gram panchayat elections.Since the voting has already been concluded, the Court opined that the impugned order doesn't require any further interference.Title- Gurmej v State of Punjab Click here to read/download the order

Punjab State Election Commission Act | Person Is Not 'Ordinarily Resident' Only Because He Owns A House In The Constituency: High Court

Aiman J. Chishti

Tags