The Punjab and Haryana high court on Friday dismissed a clutch of public interest litigations (PILs) demanding polling for the May 26 municipal elections in the state by electronic voting machines (EVMs) instead of ballot papers, ruling that it was too late in the day to interfere.
Among the pleas was one by Mohali-based advocate Ruchita Garg, challenging the state election commission’s (SEC) decision to use ballot papers for municipal corporations, municipal councils, and nagar panchayats.
A bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu observed that the election programme had progressed to an advanced stage where the last date for withdrawal of candidature was May 19 and only the polling remained. Declining interference, the bench dismissed the petitions.
The detailed order is awaited.
The dispute had earlier triggered a blame game, with the SEC initially claiming the Election Commission of India (ECI) told them EVMs were unavailable. The ECI strongly controverted this, stating that while guidelines require an EVM requisition six months prior to polls, Punjab’s demand only came in January. Despite this, the ECI informed the court on Thursday that under extraordinary circumstances, it had despatched the required EVMs from neighbouring Rajasthan on May 21 to be handed over to the Punjab SEC.
The ECI counsel dismissed the SEC’s apprehensions about eleventh-hour commissioning, stating the ECI would facilitate the process and that state employees would only require 15 minutes of training to use the machines on May 26.
{{/usCountry}}The ECI counsel dismissed the SEC’s apprehensions about eleventh-hour commissioning, stating the ECI would facilitate the process and that state employees would only require 15 minutes of training to use the machines on May 26.
{{/usCountry}}However, the SEC counsel argued that all preparations for the polls were complete and EVMs could not be introduced at this stage without proper training and political party consultation. Raising concerns over potential malfunctions and ongoing public controversies around EVMs, the counsel pointed out that the SEC had successfully conducted zila parishad polls via ballot papers just five months ago without any major issues.
The court was informed that the printing of ballot papers began immediately after the nomination period ended, with ₹50 lakh already spent on the exercise.
Punjab advocate general MS Bedi also opposed the PILs, arguing they were not maintainable and citing judicial pronouncements to emphasise that with elections just days away, there was no occasion for the court to interfere.