Earlier, a single judge of the Delhi High Court dismissed Govind Yadav’s plea, stating that the Election Commission had already rejected his objections. The court observed that the faction led by Nitish Kumar was recognized as the legitimate JDU.
NEW DELHI: On 3rd March, The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Govind Yadav, an expelled member of the Janata Dal United (JDU), challenging the election of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar as the party’s president.
A division bench, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, rejected the appeal, upholding an earlier decision by a single judge.
Govind Yadav had filed a petition questioning certain official communications made by JDU on 10.11.2016, 13.11.2019, 18.02.2021, 03.08.2021, and 27.09.2021. He argued that these communications were issued based on fraudulent elections that violated the JDU’s constitution and rules. He sought to have these communications declared illegal under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Earlier, a single judge of the Delhi High Court dismissed Govind Yadav’s plea, stating that the Election Commission had already rejected his objections. The court observed that the faction led by Nitish Kumar was recognized as the legitimate JDU.
Furthermore, it confirmed that “his faction was granted the right to use the reserved election symbol ‘arrow’ as a state party in Bihar.”
The division bench upheld the single judge’s ruling and dismissed the appeal.
The bench stated, “The appeal challenging the decision in the court has no solid basis.”
Expressing complete agreement with the single judge’s verdict, the court further said, “We are completely satisfied with the decision given by the single judge, which states that the relief sought by the petitioner is completely outside the scope of scrutiny under Section 29A (9) of the Representation of the People Act.”
The division bench concluded by affirming,
“We agree with the opinion given by the single judge in this case and dismiss the appeal, finding it without any basis.”
