Delhi Mayor Polls: Nominated Members Can't Vote, Notify Election In 24 Hours, Rules Supreme Court

The Supreme Court said election of the Delhi mayor should be conducted at the first MCD meeting.

In a major relief for the ruling AAP in its tussle with the Delhi L-G, the Supreme Court on Friday ruled that members nominated by the Lieutenant Governor (LG) could not vote in the polls to elect the Mayor of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). The Supreme Court also ordered the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi Vinai Kumar Saxena to announce within 24 hours the date of the polls to elect the Mayor.

The top court also held that nominated members cannot vote neither in the elections for Deputy Mayor nor for the standing committees. Also, the election of the Mayor has to precede the election of Deputy Mayor, Bar and Bench reported.

"At the first meeting of MCD, election shall be held of post of Mayor. In that meeting, nominated members shall not have the right to vote. After the Mayor is elected, he shall be the presiding officer for electing deputy Mayor," the Supreme Court said.

"Notice for the election of Mayor and first meeting of MCD shall be issued within 24 hours and notice shall fix the date on which election of Mayor, deupty Mayor and standing committee members shall be held in terms of above direction," the court ordered.

The SC bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice JB Pardiwala, was hearing a petition filed by AAP leader Shelly Oberoi in connection with the election of mayor of the Delhi municipal corporation.

Rejecting the arguments of the Delhi LG that nominated members are entitled to vote, the SC said, "The prohibition on nominated members exercising the right to vote in terms of S 3(3)(b)(1) shall apply to the first meeting where the mayor and the deputy mayor are to be elected".

"Aldermen (nominated members) cannot vote and that is the basic principle of democracy," CJI Chandrachud said orally after dictating the order.

Nominated Members Can't Go For Election, Constitutional Provision Clear: SC

In its earlier hearing, the Supreme Court had orally observed that nominated members cannot go for the election and the constitutional provision is very clear.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the petitioner, had contended before the bench, that Article 243 R of the Constitution makes it very clear. Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain, representing the office of Delhi LG, suggested that the election scheduled on February 16 can take place after February 17.

At this, Chief Justice Chandrachud asked the Additional Solicitor General: "Are you disputing the fact that nominated members should not vote, that is very well settled. That is a clear constitutional provision."

As Senior advocate Maninder Singh said: "We should get an opportunity to convince the lordships that may be permissible...". The Chief Justice asked, "under which provision it is permissible?"

As per IANS, advocate Maninder Singh said the provision under which it permits members to be part of a standing committee and they become full-fledged members. He urged the top court to grant some time to argue the matter.

On the other hand, Singhvi termed the argument as a fallacy, corporation aldermen are excluded and, in the corporation, they are specifically excluded and in the standing committee they can vote, "and we are not on standing committee".

Singh replied that is for the argument which has to be considered, IANS reported.

The bench said that they will be permitted in a committee is a different aspect of the matter. Singh said there are three committees that constitute the corporation itself.

Advocate Shadan Farasat, representing Shelly Oberoi, submitted that the petitioner is seeking two directions - nominated members shall not be allowed to vote and elections of mayors, deputy mayor, and standing committee should be separate.

He said this is clear from the black letter of the law and also relied on Section 76 of the DMC Act to argue that the Mayor and Deputy Mayor have to preside over all meetings. It was contended that the simultaneous holding of elections for three posts (Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and standing committee members) is contrary to the DMC Act.

Earlier this month, the apex court had sought a response from the office of the LG, pro tem presiding officer Satya Sharma of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), and others on the AAP mayor candidate's petition.