High Court Rules That Article 243-ZG of the Constitution Bars Judicial Interference in Electoral Matters Through Writ Petitions; Remedy Lies Under Section 31 of Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009
Jaipur, September 9, 2026: In a significant ruling reinforcing the sanctity of the electoral process and the statutory framework governing municipal elections, the Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) on Tuesday disposed of a writ petition filed by one Kanhaiya Lal, a resident seeking to contest the Ward Member election from Ward No. 35, Municipal Board Brij Nagar, District Deeg. The Court, presided over by Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, held that it lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the challenge against the improper rejection of a nomination paper by way of a writ petition, citing the constitutional bar under Article 243-ZG of the Constitution of India.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Kanhaiya Lal, had filed nomination papers for the post of Ward Member from Ward No. 35, Nagar Palika Brij Nagar, District Deeg, in connection with Municipal Board elections scheduled in August-September 2026. However, the Returning Officer rejected his nomination paper vide an order dated September 1, 2026, invoking Section 24(iii) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009. The ground cited for rejection was that the petitioner was an undertrial in a competent court, which had taken cognizance of an offence and framed charges against him for a crime punishable with imprisonment for more than five years — a disqualifying criterion under the Act.
Aggrieved by this rejection, the petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition, challenging the impugned order and seeking a direction to permit him to participate in the elections.
Petitioner's Contentions
Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Saini, argued that although the petitioner had indeed not disclosed the pending criminal case in his nomination form, the Returning Officer had rejected the nomination without affording him any opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the fundamental principles of natural justice. Counsel contended that such rejection without a hearing was not sustainable in the eyes of law and sought quashing of the impugned order dated September 1, 2026.
Court's Reasoning
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, after carefully examining the submissions and the relevant legal provisions, firmly held that the High Court does not possess jurisdiction to entertain such a writ petition owing to the express constitutional bar under Article 243-ZG of the Constitution of India. The Court observed that Article 243-ZG clearly mandates that no election to any municipality shall be called in question except by way of an Election Petition, presented to such authority and in the manner provided by law made by the State Legislature.
The Court further relied on the landmark Supreme Court judgment in N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency, (1952) 1 SCC 94, wherein the Apex Court had broadly interpreted the term "election" to encompass the entire election procedure — including the acceptance or rejection of nomination papers — and not merely the final result of the election. Accordingly, even an improper rejection of a nomination paper forms part of the election process and can only be challenged through an election petition.
Statutory Remedy Available
The High Court highlighted that Section 31 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, specifically provides that the improper rejection of a nomination paper is one of the statutory grounds on which an election petition can be filed before the District Judge having territorial jurisdiction over the municipal area, within one month from the date of election. The Court noted that the Legislature has placed improper rejection and improper acceptance of nomination papers on equal footing as grounds for declaring an election void.
Granting liberty to the petitioner, the Court disposed of the writ petition and directed him to avail the appropriate statutory remedy by filing an election petition under Section 31 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, before the competent District Judge.
All pending applications, including the stay application, were also disposed of accordingly.
Bottom Line:
Election laws - Improper rejection of nomination paper cannot be challenged through a writ petition in the High Court due to the statutory bar under Article 243-ZG of the Constitution of India. Remedy lies in filing an election petition under Section 31 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009.
Statutory Provision(s):
Article 243-ZG of the Constitution of India, 1950; Section 24(iii) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009; Section 31 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009
