Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968

17 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

JEEVAN CHANDRABHAN IDNANI & ANR.versusDIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, KONKAN BHAVAN & ORS.

2012 INSC 5631 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the formation of a post‑poll "aghadi" (front) by councillors of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation after municipal elections. The petitioners argued that the second proviso to sub‑section (2) of Section 31A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 allows the creation of an aghadi or

KRISHNA MOHINIversusMOHINDER NATH SOFAT

1999 INSC 49126 October 1999Dismissed

In the Solan constituency election, the petitioner Mohinder Nath Sofat challenged the election of Krishna Mohini on two grounds: the alleged improper rejection of the nomination papers of Pritam Chand and Mohan Singh, who were alternate candidates of unrecognised parties, and the alleged illegal acceptance of Jagdish C

JANATA DAL (SAMAJWADI)versusTHE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA

1995 INSC 77423 November 1995Dismissed

Janata Dal (Samajwadi) was recognised as a national party on 16 April 1991. After the Lok Sabha and several state assembly elections held between April and June 1991, the Election Commission found that the party no longer satisfied the criteria in paragraph 6(2) of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order

RAM PHAL KUNDUversusKAMAL SHARMA

2004 INSC 5523 January 2004Appeal(s) allowed

In the 2000 Haryana Legislative Assembly election, two candidates, Kamal Sharma and Bachan Singh, both claimed to be the official Congress candidate for the Safidon constituency. Both filed Form B with the Returning Officer; Bachan Singh’s Form B, submitted later, rescinded the earlier notice in favour of Kamal and was

QUAMARUL ISLAMversusS.K. KANTA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 2021 January 1994

The returned candidate Quamarul Islam contested the 1989 Karnataka Assembly election and was challenged by his rival S.K. Kanta on alleged corrupt practices under Sections 123(2), (3), (3A) and (4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, including religious appeals and false statements. The High Court set aside

G.S. IQBALversusK.M. KHADAR & ORS.

2009 INSC 36819 March 2009Dismissed

The petitioner, G.S. Iqbal, challenged the election of K.M. Khader (the returned candidate) to the Lok Sabha on the grounds that the returned candidate was a member of two political parties at the time of filing his nomination, thereby violating Section 100(1)(d)(i) and (iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 195

MANDA JAGANATHversusK.S. RATHNAM AND ORS.

2004 INSC 27316 April 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The first respondent filed a nomination for the Lok Sabha election from Nagarkurnool (SC) constituency, but the Returning Officer rejected his Form B for leaving columns 2‑7 blank and consequently treated him as an independent candidate, refusing to allot the party symbol of Telangana Rashtra Samithi. The respondent an

ANIL BALUNIversusSURENDRA SINGH NEGI

2005 INSC 29414 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Election Commission notified elections for the Uttaranchal Legislative Assembly and the appellant, Anil Baluni, filed four sets of nomination papers on 22 January 2002 along with Forms A and B of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968. The Returning Officer later rejected the papers, claiming

SUBHASH DESAIversusPRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2023 INSC 51611 May 2023Disposed off

After the 2019 Maharashtra elections a coalition government (MVA) led by Uddhav Thackeray collapsed in mid‑2022 when the Shiv Sena split into two factions headed by Thackeray and Eknath Shinde. The Governor, relying on letters from opposition leaders and a resolution of 34 Shiv Sena MLAs, directed Thackeray to prove hi

BRAJESH SINGHversusSUNIL ARORA & ORS.

2021 INSC 38810 August 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a contempt petition filed by Brajesh Singh alleging that several political parties wilfully disobeyed the Court's order dated 13‑02‑2020, which required parties to disclose the criminal antecedents of their candidates and the reasons for their selection, within 48 hours of nomination. The

RAKESH KUMARversusSUNIL KUMAR

1999 INSC 489 February 1999Dismissed

In the 1997 Punjab Vidhan Sabha election, three candidates, including Sunil Kumar, filed nomination papers as BJP candidates. The Returning Officer (RO) raised a suo motu objection that the BJP had set up more than one candidate and rejected all three nominations. Sunil Kumar applied under Section 36(5) of the Represen

SATHI VIJAY KUMARversusTOTA SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9728 December 2006Disposed off

Sathi Vijay Kumar, a losing candidate in the 2002 Punjab Assembly election, filed an election petition alleging that the returned candidate, Tota Singh, had committed corrupt practices, including the wrongful deletion of 586 voters' names and the assistance of a gazetted officer. The High Court dismissed several paragr

EDAPADDI K. PALANISWAMIversusDHINAKARAN & ORS.

[2019] 3 S.C.R. 2007 February 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a miscellaneous application filed by T.T.V. Dhinakaran (respondent No.1) seeking directions to use a common symbol and name for his faction in upcoming elections, while a writ petition challenging the Election Commission's (ECI) decision on the AIADMK party split remained pending before the

UNION TERRITORY OF LADAKH & ORS.versusJAMMU AND KASHMIR NATIONAL CONFERENCE & ANR.

2023 INSC 8046 September 2023Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by the Union Territory of Ladakh and related authorities against a High Court order that directed them to recognise the "Plough" symbol for the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (J&K NC) in the upcoming Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC) elections. J&K NC argue

DRAVIDA MUNNETRA KAZHAGAMversusTHIRU. C. VE. SHANMUGAM

2025 INSC 9766 August 2025Disposed off

The Tamil Nadu government launched the "Ungaludan Stalin" welfare scheme, naming it after a living political leader. An opposition Member of Parliament filed a representation before the Election Commission under Clause 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, and subsequently a writ petition

POTHULA RAMA RAOversusPENDYALA VENKATA KRISHNA RAO AND ORS.

2007 INSC 8042 August 2007Dismissed

The appellant, a voter, filed an election petition seeking to declare the election of the first respondent, a legislator, void on four grounds: improper rejection of a dummy candidate’s nomination, acceptance of the respondent’s nomination despite a double entry in the electoral roll, acceptance of a Bahujan Samaj Part

ANOOP BARANWALversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 1902 March 2023Case Partly allowed

The writ petitions challenged the constitutional validity of the practice of appointing the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) solely by the executive. The Supreme Court examined Article 324(2) and Constituent Assembly debates, concluding that Parliament was intended to enact a law gover

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search