2026 INSC 716
Pranesh M.K. v. A.V. Gayathri Shanthegowda & Ors.
HEAD NOTES
A. Constitution of India — Arts. 171(3)(a) & 243-R — Legislative Council Elections — Local Authorities' Constituency — Nominated members of Town Panchayats — Right to vote — No such right.
(Paras 29 to 38 & 48)
Held, nominated members appointed under Section 352(1)(b) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 do not possess the right to vote in elections to the Legislative Council from a Local Authorities' Constituency. Article 243-R of the Constitution makes a deliberate distinction between elected representatives and nominated members, whose role is merely advisory. The expressions "members of municipalities" in Article 171(3)(a) and "every member" in Section 27(2)(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 must receive a purposive and harmonious interpretation consistent with the constitutional scheme of democratic local self-government and therefore refer only to elected members having voting rights in the concerned local authority.
B. Constitution of India — Art. 226 — Electoral Roll — Writ Petition — Maintainability.
(Paras 22 to 26)
Held, a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of inclusion of nominated members in the electoral roll before commencement of the election process is maintainable. Where the controversy raises a pure question of constitutional and statutory interpretation and the statutory remedy is ineffective or illusory, existence of an alternative remedy does not bar exercise of writ jurisdiction.
C. Representation of the People Act, 1950 — S.27(2)(b) — Electoral Roll — Expression "every member" — Interpretation.
(Paras 27 to 38)
Held, the expression "every member" occurring in Section 27(2)(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 cannot be interpreted literally in isolation. It must be harmoniously construed with Article 243-R of the Constitution and therefore includes only those members who are democratically elected and possess voting rights in the local authority.
D. Representation of the People Act, 1951 — S.100(1)(d)(iii) — Void votes — Materially affecting election result.
(Paras 43 & 44)
Held, where constitutionally ineligible persons participate in the election and the number of such invalid votes exceeds the margin of victory, the requirement of "materially affected" under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) stands satisfied and the election is liable to be declared void.
E. Electoral Rolls — Finality — Constitutional illegality — Effect.
(Paras 39 to 42)
Held, the principle of finality of electoral rolls cannot validate participation of persons whose inclusion is constitutionally void ab initio. While ordinary defects or irregularities in electoral rolls cannot ordinarily be reopened after the election, constitutional ineligibility affecting the composition of the electoral college stands on a different footing and cannot be protected by the doctrine of finality.
F. Elections — Secrecy of Ballot — Scope.
(Paras 45 & 46)
Held, secrecy of the ballot, though a fundamental feature of the electoral process, is not absolute. Where exclusion of constitutionally void votes requires identification of ballot papers through legally permissible statutory records without conducting an inquiry into voting preferences, such exercise does not violate the principle of ballot secrecy.
G. Constitutional Interpretation — Purposive and Harmonious Construction.
(Paras 29 to 38)
Held, constitutional provisions relating to democratic institutions must be interpreted harmoniously so as to advance the objective of representative democracy. A literal interpretation leading to a situation where nominated members, though denied voting rights in municipal affairs, are nevertheless permitted to elect members of the Legislative Council would defeat the constitutional purpose underlying Part IX-A of the Constitution.
Analysis of Facts
The appellant was declared elected to the Karnataka Legislative Council from the Chikkamagaluru Local Authorities' Constituency by a margin of six votes. Twelve nominated members of various Town Panchayats had been included in the electoral roll and had participated in the election.
The inclusion of these nominated members was challenged before the High Court, which held that they were constitutionally ineligible to vote and directed deletion of their names from the electoral roll. Consequential election petitions sought exclusion of the votes cast by the nominated members and recounting.
The High Court ordered opening of the ballot boxes, segregation of votes cast by the nominated members and recount of votes. The returned candidate challenged the legality of these directions before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's view that nominated members were constitutionally ineligible to participate in the electoral college and upheld the consequential directions for recount.
Analysis of Law
The Court laid down the following principles:
Article 243-R creates a clear constitutional distinction between elected representatives and nominated members of municipalities.
The expressions "members of municipalities" in Article 171(3)(a) and "every member" in Section 27(2)(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 must be interpreted in harmony with the constitutional scheme introduced by the Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment.
Nominated members, having only advisory functions and lacking democratic mandate, cannot constitute part of the electoral college for Legislative Council elections.
Writ jurisdiction remains available where the challenge concerns the constitutional validity of the electoral roll itself and the statutory remedy is ineffective.
The doctrine of finality of electoral rolls cannot override constitutional invalidity.
Where constitutionally void votes materially affect the election result, the election is liable to be declared void under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Limited identification and exclusion of constitutionally void votes does not violate ballot secrecy where carried out in accordance with statutory safeguards.
Ratio Decidendi
Nominated members of Town Panchayats, who are constitutionally denied voting rights in municipal affairs under Article 243-R of the Constitution, cannot be treated as members of the electoral college for elections to the Legislative Council from Local Authorities' Constituencies. The expressions "members of municipalities" in Article 171(3)(a) of the Constitution and "every member" in Section 27(2)(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 must receive a purposive and harmonious interpretation confined to democratically elected members. Consequently, votes cast by constitutionally ineligible nominated members are void and, where such votes materially affect the election result, the election is liable to be set aside.
