#Electoral Integrity

Madras High Court directs the appointment of an independent Returning Officer to oversee Tamil Nadu Pharmacy Council elections, ensuring compliance with Rule 8 of the Tamil Nadu Pharmacy Council Rules, 1953. The ruling addresses allegations of irregularities and reinforces statutory compliance in electoral processes for statutory bodies.

Madras HC reaffirms that challenges to candidate affidavit disclosures must be raised exclusively through election petitions under Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Article 329(b) precludes alternative remedies like writ petitions, reinforcing the statutory exclusivity of election disputes.

Chhattisgarh High Court upholds the sanctity of voter mandate, ruling that election results can only be set aside for gross illegality, not minor discrepancies or procedural lapses. The judgment reinforces that objections must be raised during the counting process to be valid, protecting municipal election outcomes from frivolous challenges.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that even without evidence of malpractice, the mere risk to public confidence in Panchayat elections requires mandatory videography, a court observer, and use of the Deputy Commissioner’s office as a neutral venue. This elevates perceived fairness as a constitutional imperative under Article 21, setting a new standard for grassroots electoral integrity across rural India.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court directed that panchayat elections for Chairman and Vice Chairman must be conducted under videography, with a court observer present, and relocated to the Deputy Commissioner’s office to ensure fairness. This ruling applies even in the absence of proven illegality, establishing a precedent for electoral transparency in local governance.

Rajasthan High Court holds that BLOs must be registered voters of their assigned polling booth unless no eligible Group-C employees or other priority candidates are available.