No statutory bar on public office holders acting as poll agents, says Orissa high court

CUTTACK: There is no statutory disqualification preventing persons holding public offices from functioning as election, polling or counting agents for contesting candidates, the Orissa High Court ruled while dismissing an election petition challenging the election of BJD MLA Aswini Kumar Patra from Jaleswar assembly constituency in the 2024 Odisha elections.

BJP leader Brajamohan Pradhan, who lost to Patra by a margin of 319 votes filed the election petition.

Justice Sashikanta Mishra, while rejecting the plea on Friday, observed that neither the Constitution nor the Representation of the People Act, 1951 bars a person holding a public office from acting as an election or counting agent. The Judge specifically held that Manas Jena, chairman of the Jaleswar Panchayat Samiti, was legally eligible to function as Patra’s election and counting agent during the polls.

Pradhan had approached the High Court seeking to declare Patra’s election void and sought a direction for conducting a fresh election in the constituency. In his petition, he alleged that Patra violated Election Commission guidelines by appointing Jena as his election and counting agent despite his position as Panchayat Samiti chairman. His counsel argued that the alleged violation was serious enough to warrant cancellation of Patra’s election.

However, Justice Mishra rejected the contention, holding that the objection raised by the petitioner was based only on executive instructions contained in the Handbook for Candidates and not on any statutory provision having the force of law.

“Neither the Constitution nor the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 create any disqualification against Manas Jena to act as election agent or counting agent,” Justice Mishra observed.

The HC further noted that merely questioning the appointment of an election or counting agent was insufficient to set aside an election result. It held that the petitioner was required to specifically plead and prove that Jena had materially influenced voters in favour of the returned candidate or that the election outcome would have been different had he not acted as agent.

Finding no such pleadings or evidence on record, Justice Mishra concluded that the challenge lacked merit and dismissed the election petition.