New Delhi, Former law minister Kapil Sibal on Saturday said that a state government employee at each table for the counting of votes for the West Bengal Assembly polls is absolutely necessary to ensure a level playing field.
Sibal, a senior advocate, said he argued in the Supreme Court that the Election Commission's circular on the deployment of staff for vote counting in West Bengal must be implemented in letter and spirit as it states that a state government employee shall also be appointed at each table.
Sibal's remarks came soon after the Supreme Court said that no further order was necessary on a Trinamool Congress plea challenging the Calcutta High Court's dismissal of its petition against the Election Commission (EC) circular on the deployment of Cental government personnel for vote counting in West Bengal.
A special bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi said the EC can choose the counting personnel, and its April 13 circular, which provides for deployment of state government employees as well, cannot be said to be incorrect.
The poll body said the apprehensions of the Trinamool Congress (TMC) of any wrongdoing is misplaced, as the circular very clearly states that there will be a mix of Central and state government employees.
Addressing a presser after the Supreme Court ruling, Sibal, who appeared for the TMC, said, "I normally don't not go for a press conference when I have appeared in a case but in this particular case I had to do it because the outcome of West Bengal polls depends on what happens in the counting rooms."
"When the TMC went to the high court, it was on the basis that the EC had issued a circular on April 13 which was not known to the party till April 29. On April 29, they moved the high court where they contended that in the absence of the TMC not knowing about it, the circular should not have been issued, which was not accepted by the court," he said.
"Then the TMC asked what is the reason that the Centre or the EC are of the opinion that there would be some problem at the time of counting and that at every counting station would have additional nominees of the Central government," he said.
In the counting room, there are counting agents of political parties and supervisors. Now the EC, through this circular, has stated that in addition, a Central government employee or a PSU official would be present at each table in the counting room, Sibal pointed out.
"That is surprising because there is already a Central government employee at the counting table, who is called a micro observer. So, that is a bit unfortunate.
"The high court said we will not interfere because the EC has wide powers. In the Supreme Court, we did not argue about the constitutionality of the circular, we merely said that whatever the circular states should be implemented," the Independent Rajya Sabha MP said.
Citing the circular, Sibal said there should be a Central government employee and a state government employee at the counting table, and this must be followed.
"We now expect that through a randomisation process, a state government employee would be appointed in each of the counting stations and tables," Sibal said.
To ensure a level playing field, there should be a state government employee at each counting table, Sibal said, adding that this "is absolutely necessary".
"People should not get the feeling that a political party is being targeted by another political party at the Centre. There are more CAPF personnel present there (in Bengal) than in Manipur. There is no war going on, there is an election. If the EC is in control of the security during the polling and the counting process, how are they afraid that other forces will interfere?" Sibal asked.
"All the proceedings are being recorded. You can't have a fear of irregularity unless you want to do some irregularity," he said.
Earlier, the EC assured the Supreme Court that the circular would be implemented in letter and spirit, and there would be state government employees also during the counting of votes on May 4.
At the outset of the hearing, Sibal, appearing for the TMC, said the circular was dated April 13, but the party came to know about it on April 29.
He said there are four issues: One, the circular appointing Central employees was issued to the DEOs on April 13, but it came to their knowledge only on April 29; two, the Election Commission says it has apprehensions of irregularity, despite having a Central nominee in the counting process; three, the poll body already has a Central government official at each counting table in the form of a micro observer; and four, the EC has not appointed state nominees even though the circular provides so.
Sibal submitted that the chief electoral officer's communication stated that there were apprehensions from various quarters on possible irregularities during vote counting.
"That is like pointing a finger at the state government," Sibal said, adding, "There must be some data. Where is (the proof of) the apprehension (raised) from each booth? They have not disclosed this. And why not tell us that they are going to have a Central government nominee?"
The bench, which held a special sitting on Saturday, told Sibal that even if the EC's circular provided for the appointment of Central employees as both counting supervisor and counting assistant, the court could not have faulted the decision.
"The option is open for the EC: whether the counting supervisor and assistant may be from the Centre or the state government. When that option is open, we cannot hold that the notification is contrary to regulations.
"Even if the EC says that both of them can be Central government employees, we could not have faulted them. Because, regulations say that either Central or state government officials can be appointed," Justice Bagchi told Sibal.
Sibal then submitted that the court may ask the EC to follow the impugned circular in its entirety, which provides for a state government nominee as well.
"All we want is, in terms of the circular, the state government nominee should be there," he said.
Senior advocate D S Naidu, appearing for the EC, submitted that the returning officer is a state government employee with overarching power to deploy personnel from any pool of government employees.
Polling for the 294 Assembly seats in West Bengal was held in two phases -- April 23 and April 29. The counting of votes will be taken up on May 4.
On April 30, the Calcutta High Court had dismissed the TMC's petition against the EC circular, saying there was no illegality in the poll panel's decision to appoint counting supervisors and assistants from the Central pool and PSU employees, instead of state government staff.
The TMC had challenged the April 13 circular that stated that at least one of the counting supervisors or assistants at each table should be a Central government or PSU employee.
Sibal, a senior advocate, said he argued in the Supreme Court that the Election Commission's circular on the deployment of staff for vote counting in West Bengal must be implemented in letter and spirit as it states that a state government employee shall also be appointed at each table.
Sibal's remarks came soon after the Supreme Court said that no further order was necessary on a Trinamool Congress plea challenging the Calcutta High Court's dismissal of its petition against the Election Commission (EC) circular on the deployment of Cental government personnel for vote counting in West Bengal.
A special bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi said the EC can choose the counting personnel, and its April 13 circular, which provides for deployment of state government employees as well, cannot be said to be incorrect.
The poll body said the apprehensions of the Trinamool Congress (TMC) of any wrongdoing is misplaced, as the circular very clearly states that there will be a mix of Central and state government employees.
Addressing a presser after the Supreme Court ruling, Sibal, who appeared for the TMC, said, "I normally don't not go for a press conference when I have appeared in a case but in this particular case I had to do it because the outcome of West Bengal polls depends on what happens in the counting rooms."
"When the TMC went to the high court, it was on the basis that the EC had issued a circular on April 13 which was not known to the party till April 29. On April 29, they moved the high court where they contended that in the absence of the TMC not knowing about it, the circular should not have been issued, which was not accepted by the court," he said.
"Then the TMC asked what is the reason that the Centre or the EC are of the opinion that there would be some problem at the time of counting and that at every counting station would have additional nominees of the Central government," he said.
In the counting room, there are counting agents of political parties and supervisors. Now the EC, through this circular, has stated that in addition, a Central government employee or a PSU official would be present at each table in the counting room, Sibal pointed out.
"That is surprising because there is already a Central government employee at the counting table, who is called a micro observer. So, that is a bit unfortunate.
"The high court said we will not interfere because the EC has wide powers. In the Supreme Court, we did not argue about the constitutionality of the circular, we merely said that whatever the circular states should be implemented," the Independent Rajya Sabha MP said.
Citing the circular, Sibal said there should be a Central government employee and a state government employee at the counting table, and this must be followed.
"We now expect that through a randomisation process, a state government employee would be appointed in each of the counting stations and tables," Sibal said.
To ensure a level playing field, there should be a state government employee at each counting table, Sibal said, adding that this "is absolutely necessary".
"People should not get the feeling that a political party is being targeted by another political party at the Centre. There are more CAPF personnel present there (in Bengal) than in Manipur. There is no war going on, there is an election. If the EC is in control of the security during the polling and the counting process, how are they afraid that other forces will interfere?" Sibal asked.
"All the proceedings are being recorded. You can't have a fear of irregularity unless you want to do some irregularity," he said.
Earlier, the EC assured the Supreme Court that the circular would be implemented in letter and spirit, and there would be state government employees also during the counting of votes on May 4.
At the outset of the hearing, Sibal, appearing for the TMC, said the circular was dated April 13, but the party came to know about it on April 29.
He said there are four issues: One, the circular appointing Central employees was issued to the DEOs on April 13, but it came to their knowledge only on April 29; two, the Election Commission says it has apprehensions of irregularity, despite having a Central nominee in the counting process; three, the poll body already has a Central government official at each counting table in the form of a micro observer; and four, the EC has not appointed state nominees even though the circular provides so.
Sibal submitted that the chief electoral officer's communication stated that there were apprehensions from various quarters on possible irregularities during vote counting.
"That is like pointing a finger at the state government," Sibal said, adding, "There must be some data. Where is (the proof of) the apprehension (raised) from each booth? They have not disclosed this. And why not tell us that they are going to have a Central government nominee?"
The bench, which held a special sitting on Saturday, told Sibal that even if the EC's circular provided for the appointment of Central employees as both counting supervisor and counting assistant, the court could not have faulted the decision.
"The option is open for the EC: whether the counting supervisor and assistant may be from the Centre or the state government. When that option is open, we cannot hold that the notification is contrary to regulations.
"Even if the EC says that both of them can be Central government employees, we could not have faulted them. Because, regulations say that either Central or state government officials can be appointed," Justice Bagchi told Sibal.
Sibal then submitted that the court may ask the EC to follow the impugned circular in its entirety, which provides for a state government nominee as well.
"All we want is, in terms of the circular, the state government nominee should be there," he said.
Senior advocate D S Naidu, appearing for the EC, submitted that the returning officer is a state government employee with overarching power to deploy personnel from any pool of government employees.
Polling for the 294 Assembly seats in West Bengal was held in two phases -- April 23 and April 29. The counting of votes will be taken up on May 4.
On April 30, the Calcutta High Court had dismissed the TMC's petition against the EC circular, saying there was no illegality in the poll panel's decision to appoint counting supervisors and assistants from the Central pool and PSU employees, instead of state government staff.
The TMC had challenged the April 13 circular that stated that at least one of the counting supervisors or assistants at each table should be a Central government or PSU employee.
