<p>A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the rules that permitted a candidate polling the largest number of votes to get elected to Parliament and legislative houses.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Advocate M L Sharma contended that democracy meant rule by majority in contrast to a rule by minority but this majority concept cannot be replaced by the largest number of votes premise as is prevalent in the present system.<br /><br />In the petition, he claimed that sub rule 64 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, was contrary to the Constitution which “does not recognise the largest word anywhere”. According to the election rules, a candidate who wins the largest number of votes could get elected in Parliament and a legislative Assembly.<br /><br />“It is the constitutional duty of the respondents (Election Commission and the Centre) to take mandate of the majority voters in favour of chosen candidate otherwise so called chosen (elected) candidate, having minority support, have no constitutional right to impose any law upon majority citizen of India,” the petitioner contended.<br /><br />The advocate said that in terms of the majority rule, only a person having more than half of the votes cast should be declared as elected.<br /></p>
<p>A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the rules that permitted a candidate polling the largest number of votes to get elected to Parliament and legislative houses.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Advocate M L Sharma contended that democracy meant rule by majority in contrast to a rule by minority but this majority concept cannot be replaced by the largest number of votes premise as is prevalent in the present system.<br /><br />In the petition, he claimed that sub rule 64 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, was contrary to the Constitution which “does not recognise the largest word anywhere”. According to the election rules, a candidate who wins the largest number of votes could get elected in Parliament and a legislative Assembly.<br /><br />“It is the constitutional duty of the respondents (Election Commission and the Centre) to take mandate of the majority voters in favour of chosen candidate otherwise so called chosen (elected) candidate, having minority support, have no constitutional right to impose any law upon majority citizen of India,” the petitioner contended.<br /><br />The advocate said that in terms of the majority rule, only a person having more than half of the votes cast should be declared as elected.<br /></p>
