democrats, america, vote-3594094.jpg

Report by Sanya Luthra


The case Sandesh Mayekar vs Union of India and Ors deals with the petitioner demanding a fair election procedure for a member of the Dental Council of India in the state of Maharashtra and therefore suggesting the process for the elections and how it should be free of all biases and should take place fairly and everyone have an equal chance of being a member.


FACTS:


A writ petition was filed by the petitioner challenging the electoral process of the member of the Dental Council of India as the maintenance of the register for the election was done by the Indian Dental Association whose president was also a member of the Dental Council of India which might have resulted in the business and not a fair decision would have been taken, as the party involved must have been partial towards their organization and as the next elections are on the board, so hoping for reform a writ petition has been filed.


PETITIONER’S CONTENTIONS:


He submits that there should be two stages of preparation for an electoral list, in stage one the date should be fixed for preparing the preliminary electoral list and then he says that there should be at least thirty days for the public to raise objections to the preliminary electoral list and then he also suggested to publish both the preliminary and the final list in both English and local newspaper which has a wide circulation in the state of Maharashtra, he also suggests that the final list should be published on the official website of Maharashtra State Dental Council.


DEFENDANT’S CONTENTIONS:


Defendant has presented no contentions and has positively taken everything.


JUDGMENT:


The court was of opinion that the petitioner is correct in suggesting a two-stage preparation of the electoral list and then publishing it in both the newspapers and also on the official website of Maharashtra State Dental Council as it will ensure a fair electoral process and will not result in any personal biasedness. The court also clarifies that the new electoral process decision is prospective and has no relation with prior elections result.

READ FULL JUDGEMENT: https://bit.ly/3XkMLe9

CITATION: 2023/DHC/000799

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *