New Delhi: The Supreme Court Saturday declined to interfere with the Calcutta High Court order that said that it was the Election Commission of India’s prerogative to appoint the counting supervisor and the counting assistant from either the state or central government.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi noted ECI’s submission that it will comply with its own circular governing appointment of vote counting supervisors for West Bengal assembly elections. Senior advocate Dama Sheshadri Naidu assured the Bench that state government employees would be there for the counting process. He added that the returning officer on the day of counting at each booth would be a state government employee.
“The returning officer has the overarching power and will be a state government officer. Each candidate will have their own tables at the counting centre,” Naidu said, allaying “completely misplaced apprehensions” raised by the Trinamool Congress (TMC), the ruling party in West Bengal.
“No further orders are needed in the SLP (Special Leave Petition). We record the submission of Mr Naidu that the circular of ECI be followed in letter and spirit,” the Bench said in its order.
SC was hearing TMC’s appeal against the 30 April order of Calcutta High Court that found nothing illegal about the Electoral Officer’s decision to deploy only central government employees as vote counting supervisors in the state. The counting in West Bengal, along with other states, is scheduled for 4 May.
“This court does not find any illegality for appointing counting supervisor and counting assistant from the Central Government/Central PSU employee instead of State Government employee,” the High Court had said.
Appearing for TMC, senior advocate Kapil Sibal raised reservations on four counts against the ECI. He said that the poll body’s circular, issued on 13 April, spoke of possible problems in every single booth. It expresses apprehension from various quarters regarding discrepancy without any basis, Sibal added, pointing to the move to employ more central government nominees for the counting process.
“Is this not pointing a finger at the state?” he said, underlining that the ECI had already appointed a layer of central government officers in the form of micro-observers.
However, the Bench appeared to disagree with Sibal’s assertion that a state government employee has to be present for the counting session.
Justice Bagchi said, “It hardly matters if he is a central government nominee or not. It is to the subjective of the ECI’s satisfaction. Your counting agents will be there. Then counting assistants, counting supervisors and micro-observers who are central government officers. We cannot hold that this notification is contrary to the regulation because one is a central government officer, while others are not. To choose wholly from one pool cannot be said to be incorrect.”
Justice Narasimha then added, “What is the proportionate representation concept? All of them are employees of the government.”
The Bench, thereafter, disposed of TMC’s appeal when ECI said the commission’s circular would be strictly followed.
(Edited by Mannat Chugh)