PANJIM: The Supreme Court of India on Monday directed the Election Commission of India (ECI), New Delhi, to file its reply by May 8 to the decision to cancel the bypoll in the Ponda Assembly constituency.
During the hearing of the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by Congress Party candidate Dr Ketan K Prabhu Bhatikar, the apex court bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta held that the interpretation of Section 151A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, was crucial.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
The petitioner has challenged the order dated April 8, 2026, passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa, setting aside the notification dated March 15, 2026, issued by the ECI announcing the schedule for the by-election to the Ponda Assembly constituency and declaring the electoral process null and void.
According to the petitioner, the bypoll was cancelled a day prior to the date of polling. During this time, all electoral arrangements were in place; postal ballot papers were issued, polling staff was deputed to carry out their election duties and the candidates had carried out extensive campaigning in the constituency. Despite all this, the conduct of the election was set aside solely on a procedural aspect based on an “erroneous” interpretation of the clarificatory proviso, i.e. Clause (a) of the proviso to Section 151A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The petitioner brought to the notice of the apex court that he was not a party to the proceedings before the High Court and therefore filed the present appeal, being directly aggrieved by the impugned judgment which set aside the Ponda bypoll scheduled on April 9, 2026.
The petitioner has stated that the impugned judgment is in conflict with decisions of other High Courts regarding the interpretation of Section 151A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Several judgments across various High Courts have held that the proviso of Clause (a) to Section 151A does not create a bar on the Election Commission of India to fill vacancies even if the remainder period is less than one year, and that the period of one year does not refer to the term of the newly elected member after the occurrence of a vacancy, but refers to the remaining term from the date of occurrence of vacancy, which ought not to be less than one year.
The matter is now listed for final hearing on May 8.
