Know 5 Conditions Indian citizens must fulfil if want to stand for elections

Know 5 Conditions Indian citizens must fulfil if want to stand for elections

India Right to Contest Election is not a fundamental Right

As per latest Judgement of Supreme Court of India, right to contest elections, stand for elections is not a fundamental right but it is a conditional right and Government of India can impose conditions and decide who can stand for elections and who cannot stand for elections.


If want to stand for the Election of Sarpanch he or she must follow and fulfill following conditions.
The law under challenge in Rajbala was introduced by the BJP-run Manohar Lal Khattar government in Haryana in 2015, as an amendment to the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The 2015 amendment introduced five new disqualifications for those who seek to stand for any post in panchayat elections.

Under this amendment, those now disqualified from standing for elections are persons:
Following are the Grounds for disqualification

1-
Against whom charges are framed in criminal cases for offences punishable with imprisonment for not less than 10 years

2-
Who fail to pay arrears, if any, owed by them to either a primary agricultural cooperative society or district central cooperative bank or district primary agricultural rural development bank

3-
Who have arrears of electricity bills,

4-
Who do not possess the specified educational qualification -
The educational qualification is specified as passing the “matriculation examination or its equivalent examination from any recognized institution/board: Provided that in case of a woman candidate or a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste, the minimum qualification shall be middle pass: Provided further that in case of a woman candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste contesting election for the post of Panch, the minimum qualification shall be 5th pass.

5-
Not having a functional toilet at their place of residence.

The amendment introducing the disqualifications was challenged by three political activists who had been disqualified from standing for panchayat elections. Their main contention rested on the “arbitrariness” of the law and its discriminatory impact in disqualifying a large part of the electorate. The petitioners also pointed out that more than 50% of the rural population of Haryana would be disqualified from standing for panchayat elections if the disqualifications were applied.

The state of Haryana justified the law on the basis that there was no fundamental right to vote or stand for elections, and in any case, the disqualifications served the larger purpose of spreading education, reducing indebtedness and greater sanitation in rural areas.

The judgment of the Supreme Court in the Raj Bala case the court has held that those who have no formal education, those who have no “functioning toilet” and those who are in rural indebtedness cannot contest an election for the position of sarpanch.


The above judgement is very dangerous for Indian Democracy.

It is the duty of Honorable Supreme Court of India to protect the rights of Indian citizens.

Can we compare a serious crime doer with uneducated Indian Citizen?

Can we compare a serious crime offender with the poor Indian citizen who cannot afford a toilet?

I do not think it is right to compare a serious criminal, offender with a simple, poor Indian citizen who is honest.

If one family who thinks that education of girl child is a waste of money and does not educate her, in this case who is responsible if she remains uneducated.

Indirectly she, the girl child loses her right to stand for election also without any fault.

India does not take the responsibility of its children, it is the responsibility of family up to age of 18 only.

one can disqualify a person from contesting if he or she has a criminal record, can the fact that you don’t have an education or a “functioning” toilet be equaled with having a criminal record? Apparently it can, as per the opinion of the Supreme Court of India.

An educated man who takes bribes and an uneducated person who works honestly in a government office

Then who is educated person.
 An officer who takes bribes or a floor clearer who does not bribe from anyone.

One can stand for the election of MP and MLA but he cannot stand for the election of Sarpanch another comedy of India law.

It’s not the duty of the Honorable Supreme Court of India to promote the cleanliness measures of Government of India in this case.

Government can make the separate law for the cleanliness and maintenance of working toilets, but government should not blackmail the citizens, maintain toilet or you lose right to contest elections.

Disqualification Point No. 2
2-
Who fail to pay arrears, if any, owed by them to either a primary agricultural cooperative society or district central cooperative bank or district primary agricultural rural development bank –
Consider the case of the farmer who has taken loan,
He faces draught and fails to pay the loans and government fails to pay him for his hungry stomach, in such cases how can government say you are not eligible to contest elections.

A complete flawed judgement by the Honorable Supreme Court of India.

Reality views by sm –

Friday, December 11, 2015

Tags – Election Contest Right Not Fundamental