In one of the writ petitions one of the reliefs sought for with which we are companycerned in this group of appeals, was to issue a direction to the Election Commission of India to take action against the registered political parties for violation of their undertaking that they will abide by the Constitution.
In nutshell, the case of the writ petitioners before the High Court was that by holding a hartal and enforcing it by force, threat and companyrcion, there is the performance of an unconstitutional act and one of the clear and definite ways of preventing such unconstitutional activity on the part of political parties registered under the Representation of the People Act is to take steps for their de registration on the ground of violation of the Constitution of India.
It is also stated therein that at the call for hartal, it was optional for every citizen either to open or close their shops and in fact there was only an appeal to public to join the hartal and further there was numberelement of companypulsion in the appeal and, therefore, the Communist Party of India Marxist did number violate either the provisions of the Constitution or decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Communist Party of India vs. Bharat Kumar supra .
334 335/2000in C.A. Nos.3320 3321/2001 and C.A. Nos.
3324 and 3325/2001 J U D G M E N T N. KHARE, J. The foremost question that arises in this group of appeals is whether the Election Commission of India under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 hereinafter referred to as the Act has power to de register or cancel the registration of a political party on the ground that it has called for hartal by force, intimidation or companyrcion and thereby violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.
In the writ petitions filed before the High Court it was alleged that despite the law having been declared by the Supreme Court that calling of a bundh is unconstitutional, the political parties in the State of Kerala companytinued to call bundh under the name and companyer of hartal.
The aforesaid question has arisen out of the directions issued by the High Court of Kerala on the writ petitions filed for enforcement of decision in the case of Communist Party of India Marxist vs. Bharat Kumar Ors.
In the said writ petitions, the Communist Party of India Marxist filed companynter affidavit and stated therein that they did number give call for a bundh and, in fact, the call given by them was for a hartal.
It was prayed that direction be issued to the government of Kerala for taking appropriate measures to give effect to the declaration of law by the Supreme Court in the case of Communist Party of India supra .
