Legality of the Andhra Pradesh Ordinance reducing term of SEC: Independence of Constitutional body questioned

Must Read

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...

Follow us

On Friday, 10th April 2020, the Andhra Pradesh Government came up with an ordinance bringing reforms in tenure of State Election Commissioner (SEC). The said ordinance reduced the term of SEC from five to three years. As a result, N. Ramesh Kumar (SEC) was removed from his office as he served his office for more than 3 years.

To everyone’s surprise, this ordinance was promulgated overnight. The Andhra Pradesh Government didn’t specify the reasons as to what was the urgent need to promulgate an ordinance, why can’t it wait for the Assembly to be convened. Also, what was the urgent need to reduce the tenure of SEC. The government asserted it necessary for making the constitutional body independent and to ensure fair elections. But it couldn’t answer what was the urgency for such ordinance during the time of health emergency and why the changes regarding the tenure of SEC weren’t made before the election started. It came up with the ordinance just before the last phase of elections.

Recently, Ramesh Kumar deferred the local elections due to the coronavirus crisis. The government disliked his decision of postponement. Thereby, it approached the Apex court. But to their surprise, the Court refused to interfere with the decision of SEC. Just after this incident A.P Government promulgated the ordinance to oust Ramesh Kumar and appointed Madras High Court retired judge as the new SEC.

This is another time when a government has tried to do something indirectly which it can’t do directly. The constitution is clear in this aspect that SEC can be removed only in the same manner as a High Court Judge. The government has acted in violation of Article 243K of the Constitution. The proviso to clause 2 of Article 243K states as:

“Provided that the State Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in the like manner and on the like ground as a Judge of a high court and the conditions of service of the State Election Commissioner shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment.”

It appears like a plan to oust the former SEC. The ordinance is an abuse of power. It stripped off the independence of the constitutional body i.e. SEC. Political influence over SEC can be witnessed through this act of the State Government. It is undemocratic and against free and fair elections.

The ordinance is challenged by Ramesh Kumar in High Court and this matter is being heard by a bench headed by Chief Justice Maheshwari. The Court has directed the government to file a reply. The court has to decide the legality of the said ordinance. It is the independence of judiciary which holds the trust of the public.

The independence of SEC must be restored and it should be kept beyond any political influence lest free and fair elections can’t be ensured. The fate of Former SEC and the independence of election authority will be decided by the Hon’ble court. It will hold open court hearing meanwhile keeping in mind social- distancing norms.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -