The Supreme Court today disposed of a plea filed by the Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP) seeking extension of the deadline for filing nominations in the Andhra Pradesh municipal elections.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana closed the matter, after it was informed by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (for AP State Election Commission) that the time for filing nominations had been extended wherever any difficulty had been found to have taken place.

Noting that the nomination period had already ended, Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant remarked, “Now contest the elections, all the best.” The bench said that it will pass a detailed order to ensure smooth conduct of elections.

Last week, a special bench comprising Justices Bagchi and Mohana had directed the SEC to consider the petitioner's plea for extension of deadline - which expired on October 18 - wherever the SEC was of the view candidates were unable to file nominations on account of law and order situation.

At the time, the special bench also instructed the SEC to defer the publication of the list of candidates until October 25. The matter was listed today for the State and SEC to report compliance.

The deadline was later extended by the SEC in certain local bodies following the Court's direction.

Today, Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, for YSRCP, again contended that many candidates of the principal opposition party were prevented from filing nomination forms. In response, the CJI expressed that Courts may be kept out of state politics. The judge assured that the bench will issue all necessary directions to the SEC to ensure free and fair elections "in the most transparent manner".

SG Tushar Mehta apprised that wherever any difficulty was found to have been experienced, SEC had extended the period for filing nomination forms. Subsequently, CJI Kant said that the Court will direct the High Court to monitor the issue on day-to-day basis.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, for the State, informed that all requisite steps were taken and security provided for (wherever asked).

At this point, Maninder Singh pointed out that 532 out of 722 candidates are contesting unopposed. CJI responded to the submission by commenting that such "sweeping statements" will not help anybody. The judge asked to give name of any candidate who went to file nomination but was prevented.

Justice Bagchi on his part remarked: "Those whose representations were favorably considered by the Election Commission have already filed. Others according to Mr Singh were not allowed or not extended despite their representations. We will keep the issue open as a valid election dispute with regard to...provided they make out a case that they actually went and were prevented...it's a disputed question of fact. We cannot go into these questions at this stage."

The judge added, "If anyone feels that his valid claim was disputed, he will take out an election petition".

When Senior Advocate Niranjan Reddy contended that one may not be able to file an election petition until the results are announced, and pointed out the court's directions for CCTV arrangement, the CJI orally said that the earlier directions regarding CCTV will continue to operate for all elections. All the recordings would have to be preserved for time beyond limitation, the CJI conveyed.

Ultimately, Maninder Singh urged the Court to adopt the same approach as in the case of Punjab municipal elections (where a retired High Court judge was appointed to look into the allegations raised during elections). In the Punjab matter, the Supreme Court had cancelled the elections in the local bodies where the fact-finding body reported violence and prevention of filing of nominations.

However, the bench said that it will not go into a fishing and roving enquiry.

Background

The YSRCP, in the petition filed through its General Secretary Lella Appireddy, contended that several of its candidates were allegedly assaulted, threatened or physically prevented from reaching nomination centres during the nomination period, which began on October 16 and ended on October 18.

According to the petition, incidents of violence were reported in Punganur, Rayachoti, Kadapa and Tirupati. The party alleged that nomination papers of a candidate in Kadapa were snatched and torn, while nine candidates contesting the Tirupati Municipal Corporation elections were prevented from entering the offices of the concerned Returning Officers.

The petition also referred to an alleged attack on the convoy of YSRCP MP P.V. Midhun Reddy while he was accompanying candidates to file their nominations. The party had earlier approached the High Court seeking additional nomination facilities at district headquarters, citing apprehensions of violence. On October 15, a Single Judge of the High Court declined to grant the relief sought and granted liberty to individual candidates to approach the concerned Election Officers.

Following the alleged incidents on October 16, the party sought an extension of the nomination deadline from the State Election Commission. The Commission directed that adequate security be provided at nomination centres but did not extend the deadline, the petition stated.