‘Court does not have the power’: Delhi HC on Rashtriya Bahujan Congress election symbol

RCB approached the division bench challenging a single judge order on October 1, 2024, which rejected its plea seeking reservation of the election symbol.

The division bench of Delhi high court on Friday rejected a plea by the Rashtriya Bahujan Congress (RBC) seeking directions to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to reserve its election symbol — a sewing machine — underscoring that a court does not have the power to do so.

Representational image.

Taking note of the fact that the party was an unrecognised political party, a bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela remarked that symbols under the Election Symbol (Reservation & Allotment) Order 1968 (Order) could only be reserved for political parties that are “recognised”.

To be sure, the order provides for reservation, allotment and choice of symbols for recognising political parties during parliamentary and assembly polls. Clause 5 of the order reserves symbols of a recognised political party for exclusive allotment to contesting candidates.

“You cannot ask for reservation on that (election symbol). Reserved symbols are only given to recognised political parties. You’re asking for the reservation of a symbol, we can’t do that,” the bench said to the counsel appearing for the petitioner and party president Dr SR Saran.

RCB had approached the division bench challenging a single judge order on October 1, 2024, which rejected its plea seeking reservation of the election symbol. In its two-page order, justice Prateek Jalan had dismissed the plea saying that there was no basis, since the party was not recognised.

In the plea filed before the division bench, the party had asserted that it had been contesting polls in the capital and other states on its election symbol for the last 20 years, but the ECI failed to respond to its request to permanently allot the symbol. It went on to add that the ECI had a mala fide intention to allot its symbol to any other party.

The ECI was represented by advocate Suruchi Suri.

The court dismissed the plea a week after another bench rejected a petition that challenged the constitutionality of the Election Symbol (Reservation & Allotment) Order 1968 on the ground that it discriminated between recognised and unrecognised political parties while reserving their symbols.

Dealing with a petition filed by Janata Party, a bench of acting chief justice Vibhu Bakhru and justice Tushar Rao Gedela had opined on January 17 that the issue was already decided by the Supreme Court in the ‘Subramanian Swamy vs Union of India’ matter (2008).

In the Swamy case, the apex court, while dealing with the Janata Party’s petition challenging clause 10A of the order, had held that symbols cannot be considered as party’s ‘exclusive property’. The said section permitted a party to retain its symbol for six years after losing its status as a recognised political party. The apex court further said that a reserved symbol can only be allotted to a recognised political party.