In Civil Appeal No.6972 of 2022-SC- Election Petitions are time-sensitive matters; Party to litigation cannot wait indefinitely for availability of reasons: SC sets aside Telangana HC order rejecting such petition after noting that no reasoned order was supplied to parties 
Justices Dinesh Maheshwari & Bela M. Trivedi [ 26-09-2022]

Read Judgment: K. MADAN MOHAN RAO Vs. BHEEMRAO BASWANTHRAO PATIL & ORS 

Tulip Kanth

New  Delhi, September 28, 2022: In a case where the reasoned order of the Telangana High Court rejecting an election petition was not supplied to the parties even after more than 3 months, the Supreme Court has opined that a party to the litigation cannot be expected to wait indefinitely for availability of the reasons for the order of the Court.

The grievance projected before the Division Bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Bela M. Trivedi was that an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) moved in the Election Petition filed by the present appellant in the Telangana High Court, was taken up for consideration after a considerable delay. 

After a prolonged hearing, the order was pronounced on June 15, 2022, whereby the application was allowed and the election petition filed by the present appellant was rejected. The reasoned order allowing the application was not available as yet.

Referring to Section 86(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 which mandates the requirement of expeditious proceedings and conclusion of trial of the election petition within six months from the date of presentation, the Bench opined that this litigation, by its very nature, called for expeditious proceedings while being assigned a specific priority by the Court dealing with the same.

The Apex Court also referred to its judgments in State of Punjab and Others v. Jagdev Singh Talwandi and Anil Rai v. State of Bihar.

Finding difficulty in countenancing the position that even after pronouncement of the result on the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on June 15, 2022, the reasoned order was not available to the parties until this date, the Bench took note of the fact that even after more than three months from pronouncement of the order by the High Court, the reasons were not forthcoming and were not available with either of the parties. Looking at the nature of litigation and the overall circumstances, the Bench was unable to countenance this position.

As a result of such factual and legal aspects, the Bench was constrained to observe that a party to the litigation cannot be expected to wait indefinitely for availability of the reasons for the order of the Court. “Moreover, when the matter relates to the election petition under the Act of 1951, which itself is a time-sensitive matter, we find no reason that the appellant be relegated to the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 116A of the Act of 1951 in this case”, the Bench remarked.

Justice Maheshwari, speaking for the Bench, held that the order dated June 15, 2022, as said to have been passed by the High Court in disposal of the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, deserved to be disapproved only for the reason that even until this date, the reasons for the said order were not available with either of the parties nor were available on the website of the High Court. The Bench also noted that a copy of the order had not been supplied despite the parties having made the applications seeking certified copy of the order.

Thus, the Bench restored the matter for re-consideration before the Chief Justice of the High Court and asked the parties through their respective counsel to stand at notice to appear before the High Court on October 10, 2022.