A single bench of High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh comprising Justice Sindhu Sharma while dismissing a Petition from a Candidate who was dismissed from service by invoking Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India relating to the interests of Security of State and seeking to accept his nomination paper to contest as independent candidate for the upcoming Lok Sabha elections has observed that the petitioner was not a duly nominated person in terms of the Representation of People Act, 1951 as the Election Commission has rejected his request for grant of certificate in terms of Section 9(2) of the Said Act.

The petitioner was dismissed from service by  invoking Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India relating to the interest of security of state. The petitioner contented that he being actively involved in public life is desirous of contesting upcoming Lok Sabha elections as an independent candidate. The petitioner alleged that despite completing all requisite formalities, his nomination paper was not accepted by the Returning Officer and that he was asked to furnish the Certificate as per section 9 of Representation of People Act, 1951 along with his nomination paper and until then his nomination paper could not be accepted. The petitioner contended that he had applied before the Election Commission of India (ECI) for the said certificate, but the election commission, despite giving him personal hearing has not taken any decision as such, there was no bar in accepting his nomination paper.

The Respondents brought to the notice of the court that the Petitioner’s request for the said certificate has been duly considered and rejected. The respondents also argued that in view of section 33 of the Act, the petitioner was not a duly nominated person and also such petitions are barred in terms of Article 329 of the Constitution of India as the process of Election had  already started and the only course available to the petitioner was to file an Election petition in this regard the respondents relied upon the Constitution Bench Judgment in Case titled ‘ N.P. Ponnuswami Vs. Namakkal Constituency and others’ reported in AIR 1952 SCC 39.

The court considering the legal position on all these aspects has held that the after the process of Election has started the petition under Artile 226 is not maintainable in view of a bar under Article 329 of the Constitution of India. Furthermore, the court also observed that in absence of certificate under section 9(2) of the Representation of People act, the petitioner is not a duly nominated person and even if his nomination paper was presented before the Returning officer the same could not be accepted. The court accordingly dismissed the petition.