Kolkata : The Calcutta High Court questioned the Election Commission over the allocation of the ‘Envelope’ election symbol ahead of the Nandigram Assembly bypoll. Justice Krishna Rao, hearing a petition filed by the Indian Secular Front (ISF), asked why the symbol was allotted to another party when ISF had been using it and was contesting the same seat.
During the hearing, the court orally observed that the election authority should act fairly and questioned the decision in view of the availability of other free symbols.
The case relates to the Nandigram Assembly bypoll scheduled for October 6. The seat was vacated by Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari.
ISF Challenges Envelope Symbol Allocation
The ISF has been using the ‘Envelope’ symbol and is contesting the Nandigram bypoll. The party approached the High Court after the Election Commission allotted the same symbol to the Democratic Trinamool Congress, led by Ritabrata Banerjee.
The dispute follows the Election Commission’s recent decision concerning the split within the Trinamool Congress. The commission had frozen the use of the All India Trinamool Congress name and its ‘Flowers and Grass’ symbol by the rival factions pending further proceedings.
The Mamata Banerjee-led faction was subsequently allotted a new name and the ‘Football Player’ symbol, while the Ritabrata Banerjee-led faction received the name Democratic Trinamool Congress along with the ‘Envelope’ symbol. The ISF was allotted the ‘Almirah’ symbol for the bypoll.
ISF challenged the allocation, arguing that it had been using the ‘Envelope’ symbol and was contesting the same constituency.
Court Questions Availability of 183 Free Symbols
During the hearing, Justice Krishna Rao asked the Election Commission’s counsel why the ‘Envelope’ symbol was allotted to another party when the commission had 183 free symbols available.
The court orally observed that the symbol should have been kept aside in the circumstances. Justice Rao also said that the authority should act in a fair manner.
The judge questioned the Election Commission’s approach and observed that repeated decisions were resulting in parties being compelled to approach courts over election-related disputes. These remarks were made orally during the hearing and are not a final finding on the merits of the Election Commission’s decision.
Election Commission Seeks Time
The Election Commission’s counsel argued that political parties contesting elections are given options from the available symbols. The petitioner’s counsel opposed the argument, pointing out that the final allocation of symbols is made by the Election Commission.
The Election Commission’s counsel sought time to obtain instructions on why the relevant notification had not been issued.
The High Court then adjourned the matter until Friday and sought a report from the Election Commission.
Nandigram Bypoll in Focus
The dispute over the election symbol comes ahead of the October 6 Nandigram bypoll. The High Court’s next hearing is expected to provide further clarity on the Election Commission’s decision and the ISF’s challenge.
