Bombay HC questions EC’s rejection of nomination filed after 11 a.m. on October 30

Bombay High Court questions Election Commission over rejection of VBA candidate's nomination papers for Maharashtra Assembly Elections.

The Bombay High Court on Monday (November 4, 2024) questioned the Election Commission (EC) regarding its rejection of nomination papers filed by Aakifahmed Dafedar, representing the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA), for the Maharashtra Assembly Elections from Mumbai’s Bandra West constituency.  

Representing Mr. Dafedar, advocates Sayed Ali Hasan and Imran Ansari argued that their client had submitted his nomination papers on October 29, 2024. However, crucial details such as his criminal antecedents and financial details were missing from the nomination papers. He was then instructed to resubmit his nomination by 11.45 a.m. on October 30. But when he went to resubmit the nomination papers, they were rejected saying the process of scrutiny had already begun. 

Challenging the maintainability of the petition, EC’s counsel Akshay Shinde contended that Mr. Dafedar should have filed an election petition instead of a writ petition. Mr. Dafedar’s nomination was rejected because the nomination was submitted after the commencement of the prescribed deadline for scrutiny, which was clearly stated as 11 a.m. on October 30, 2024.

Mr. Shinde provided a copy of the nomination receipt that stated that the scrutiny would begin at 11 a.m. on October 30, 2024, reinforcing that Mr. Dafedar was fully aware of this requirement. He also pointed out that the missing information in the petitioner’s nomination papers rendered the submission effectively invalid since those were essential details and that his was not an isolated case, as several other nominations across the State were rejected for the same reason.  

Mr. Hasan argued that the EC’s rejection was unjustified and that the nominations should be accepted during regular working hours.  

A Division-Bench of Justices Arif S. Doctor and Somasekhar Sundaresan asked the EC, “We want to know how you arrived at this 11 a.m. deadline. Why couldn’t it be, say, noon or even 1 p.m.? Working hours start at 11 a.m., so why impose that deadline? How did you determine that 11 a.m. should be the cut-off? Why not till the entire working hours for the day? File an affidavit tomorrow [Tuesday (November 5, 2024)] itself.” The matter is scheduled for further hearing on Tuesday (November 5, 2024), November 5.