Municipal council poll: Not impressed with submissions of UP & SEC, says SC

The Supreme Court Tuesday said it is not impressed by the submissions of the Uttar Pradesh government and the State Election Commission (SEC) that to avoid duplication to the election process, the poll for a newly created municipal council be allowed to be conducted along with elections of other local bodies in November next year.

The top court on September 17 this year had directed the SEC to ensure that the elections for establishing the newly constituted municipal council are conducted at the earliest and in any case, completed within two months.

Observing that it is neither open to continue administrator for an indefinite period nor the local body should remain unrepresented by the elected representatives for such a long time, the apex court directed the concerned authorities to ensure that the election is completed as per the schedule noted in its order passed today.

It extended the timeline for conducting the elections as per the affidavit of the state government which projected that four months would be required to complete the statutory compliances.

A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar, which was hearing an application seeking extension of time to conduct elections, said that directions given by the apex court in its September 17 order ought to have been complied with by the concerned authorities and duty holders in right earnest.

If that had been done, the elections would have been concluded before November 2021, the bench, also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar, said.

The bench said, We may note that we are not impressed by the submissions made by the State Election Commission as well as the State Government that to avoid duplication to the election process, the subject election may be allowed to be conducted along with elections of other corporations/councils in November 2022, or for that matter, when the Assembly elections are due in March 2022.

The bench said that failure to comply with the direction will be viewed seriously and all the duty holders, including the Chief Secretary of the state and the Chief State Election Commissioner, shall be responsible in that regard and may be proceeded appropriately.

It also noted that there is a statutory bar for continuing the term of administrator, which admittedly had expired long back.

However, as the application points out, there are some statutory compliances which will have to be undertaken, for which timelines have been prescribed in the statute itself. Therefore, by way of indulgence, we deem it appropriate to extend the time frame, as per the schedule given in the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the State Government (Uttar Pradesh), the bench said in its order.

It noted the details of the affidavit which said authorities require four months to undertake certain statutory compliances.

The bench, while disposing of the application, said no request for a further extension on any ground will be countenanced hereafter.