The recent rejection by the Supreme Court (SC) of India of the Andhra Pradesh government’s plea to stay a high court order has made noteworthy headlines. The particular case in question pertains to an ordinance passed by the Andhra Pradesh state government which was nullified by the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
The Origin of the Case
The beginning of this legal tussle lies in the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2020. Its purpose was to bring about changes to Section 200 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.
Key Amendments
The primary modification proposed by the ordinance was limiting the eligibility of the State Election Commissioner (SEC) appointment to only retired high court judges whereas previously, retired bureaucrats were also eligible for the post.
A second but equally significant amendment was the reduction of the tenure of the SEC from five years to three years, leading to the sitting SEC stepping down and a new commissioner being appointed.
Legal Challenge and High Court Ruling
These amendments instigated a legal challenge leading to the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s involvement. The High Court dismissed the alterations that limited the SEC post to retired high court judges, ruling that the ordinance did not meet the reasonableness test specified in Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Further observations led the court to conclude that the appointment of the new Commissioner was made under Section 200 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, not under Constitution’s Article 243K(1).
The court also objected to the changes concerning the term of office of the SEC. It declared that the SEC is a constitutionally defined functionary according to Article 243K and has a right to serve until the end of tenure.
Constitutional Rights of the State Election Commission
The State Election Commission is a constitutionally defined body mandated to conduct free, fair and impartial elections for local bodies in the state.
Article 243K(1) of the Constitution specifies that the superintendence, direction, and control of the preparation of electoral rolls, and the conduct of all elections, are vested in a State Election Commission led by a State Election Commissioner, appointed by the Governor.
Menacing a Judge of a High Court
According to Article 243K (2) of the Constitution, the SEC cannot be removed from office except in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Judge of a High Court. Additionally, it states that the terms of service of the State Election Commissioner cannot be altered to their disadvantage after appointment.
The Doctrine of Reasonability Test
The Doctrine of Reasonability Test, developed by the Indian Judiciary, stipulates that any exemption to equality is permissible only if the state provides justifiable reasons for segregating people differently. Reasonable classification for special treatment doesn’t violate Article 14. This principle is demonstrated in affirmative actions formulated under Article 15 and Article 16 of the Constitution.
