Calcutta HC Says No Illegality In EC Decision To Use Central, PSU Staff For Counting

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea challenging the Election Commission’s directive to deploy central government and PSU employees for vote counting in the West Bengal Assembly elections.

Polling for the 294-member Assembly was held in two phases on April 23 and April 29, with counting scheduled for May 4.

Dismissing the petition, Justice Krishna Rao held that there was no illegality in the EC’s decision to appoint counting supervisors and assistants from central government or PSU employees instead of state government staff.

“It is the prerogative of the office of the EC to appoint the counting supervisor and counting assistant either from the state government or the central government,” the court observed.

The petition was filed

by the TMC, which challenged an April 30 communication issued by the Additional Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, stating that at least one of the counting supervisor or assistant at each table should be a central government or PSU employee.

Appearing for the TMC, counsel Kalyan Banerjee argued that the communication was issued without jurisdiction and was based on mere apprehension.

EC counsel DS Naidu contended that the Representation of the People Act, 1951, allows delegation of the Commission’s functions and that the directive was valid.

He also submitted that the communication was issued on April 13, but the petition was filed only on April 30, close to the counting date, alleging that the move was intended to stall the process.

Naidu claimed that the petitioner’s intention in filing the petition at this juncture is only to stall the counting on May 4.

Passing the order, Justice Rao stated that the court does not agree with the petitioner’s (TMC’s) allegation that its main opponent, the BJP, controls central government/central PSU employees, making them susceptible to suggestion and control by the Union government.

The court noted that apart from counting supervisors and assistants, micro observers, counting agents of candidates and other personnel would also be present in the counting hall.

“Thus, it is impossible to believe the allegation made by the petitioner,” Justice Rao said.