Fwd: [CentralPark-FlatOwners] FW: [IITDBatch1979] FW: Constitution Allows "I Vote Not to Vote"

[urmila datt]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: urmila datt <umi...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:47 AM
Subject: Fwd: [CentralPark-FlatOwners] FW: [IITDBatch1979] FW: Constitution Allows "I Vote N

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Hemant Singh <hsingh-...@modi.com>
Date: Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 5:39 PM
Subject: [CentralPark-FlatOwners] FW: [IITDBatch1979] FW: Constitution Allows "I Vote Not to Vote"
To: centralpark...@yahoogroups.com

This is interesting!

 

---

From: IITDBa...@yahoogroups.com [mailto:IITDBa...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Deepak Agarwal
Sent: 02 December 2008 17:16
To: Sushumna Agarwal; praveen agarwal; Praveen Agarwal; Astha Ahuja; Vasu Anand; Ashima Arora; Bharat B Arora; Surinder Arya; B. Babu; ABHIMANYU BAHL; sunil Chandra; Rajshekhar Chauhan; Rachana Chhabra; Vippan Chhibbar; Subhash [JNJINDE NON J&J] Garg; Dhiraj Garg; Vikram Singh Gaur; Mayank Gaur; Naveen Goswami; neenu goyal; pardeep gupta; Sushil Gupta; Purshotam Gupta; IITDAA-1979-Batch; R.P. JONEJA; Harinder Kapoor; Sunil Kaul; Nitish Khanna; Saumya Khati; poonam kirpal; Vivek Kumar; Laxmikant; N C MATHUR; Vijay Mehra; Prikshit Mehra; Rakesh Mehta; rahul mehta; Dhiraj Mittal; Ramakant Mittal; Sumeer Munjaal; Radha Murali; Hitesh Nagar; Umesh U. Nama; Sushil Pandit; Padam Singh Rana; Johney Reberio; Malik Sanjay; Rameshwar Saraswat; deepak sarwal; Srikant Sastri; shakher; vivek sharma; Prabhjot Singh; winnie singh; pooja.singhal; Subrata Sinha; ravikiran sood; Aravamuthan Srinivasan; Namrata Suri; Jyoti Thapar; Rajindar Wadhwa
Subject: [IITDBatch1979] FW: Constitution Allows "I Vote Not to Vote"

 

Deepak Agarwal Nipoon Computer Aids Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.11, Pace City-I, Sector 37, Gurgaon - 122 001. Tel: 0124-4031105, 9313371687   Constitution Allows "I Vote Not to Vote" Did you know that there is a system in our constitution, as per the 1969 act, in section "49-O" that a person can go to the polling booth, confirm his identity, get his finger marked and convey the presiding election officer that he doesn't want to vote for anyone! Yes such a feature is available, but obviously these seemingly notorious leaders have never disclosed it. This is called "49-O".   Why should you go and say "I VOTE NOBODY"… because, in a ward, if a candidate wins, say by 123 votes, and that particular ward has received "49-O" votes more than 123, then that polling will be cancelled and will have to be re-polled . Not only that, but the candidature of the contestants will be removed and they cannot contest the re-polling, since people had already expressed their decision on them . This would bring fear into parties and hence look for genuine candidates for their parties for election. This would change the way, of our whole political system… it is seemingly surprising why the election commission has not revealed such a feature to the public…. Please spread this news to as many as you know… Seems to be a wonderful weapon against corrupt parties in India … show your power, expressing your desire not to vote for anybody, is even more powerful than voting… so don't miss your chance. So either vote, or vote not to vote (vote 49-O)! Circulate this and create general awareness before the polls.

---

Get an email ID as your...@ymail.com or your...@rocketmail.com. Click here.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar

MARKETPLACE

---

From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

Recent Activity

•  1
  New Members

Visit Your Group

Y! Messenger

Want a quick chat?

Chat over IM with

group members.

Everyday Wellness

on Yahoo! Groups

Find groups that will

help you stay fit.

Dog Zone

on Yahoo! Groups

Join a Group

all about dogs.

.

__,_._,___

[Sarvadaman Oberoi]

The option is under Rule 49O of Election Rules 1961 not under any Article of the Constitution of India.   But the electronic voting machines have no such provision, as such this is a dead letter, neither are the booth officials aware of this provision, and, unless the Rules for electronic voting machines are amended as well, this procedure for no vote is a dead letter.   The Election Commission of India speaks of an ongoing case (in 2004) in Supreme Court about this by PUCL(letter to PM in 2004 on their website) but this seems to be an incorrect reference.    Maybe a case needs to be filed since the right to vote has been declared a fundamental right by SC whereas right to elect has been declared by SC NOT to be a fundamental right!!! 1. The right not to vote could be viewed as a right not to elect ............ ?   2. The right to give a negative vote (option - none of the above under Rule 49O) should be the converse of right to vote and should be a fundamental right? The matter would have to be tested in a fit case before the SC.   Regards. Sarvadaman Oberoi Tower 1 Flat 1102, The Uniworld Garden, Sohna Road, Gurgaon 122018 Haryana INDIA Mobile: +919818768349 Tele: +911244227522 Website: http://www.freewebs.com/homeopathy249/ email: mob...@yahoo.co.uk --- On Wed, 3/12/08, urmila datt <umi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[DALEL AHLAWAT]

Dear Sarvadaman

 

Right not to vote and to cast a negative vote are two different things.Rule 49-O is a part of the procedure, where a person having gone through the entire accounting to the voting machine, decides to exercises his fundamental right of voting by deciding not to vote at the last moment.Documentation is only because the procedure could not be completed as stated in the rule. It is similar to where the Presiding Officer does not permit a person to vote in the polling booth for violation of procedure, makes necessary entries in that regard.These are required where candidates challenge the election for rigging etc.

 

Right of negative vote is a revolutionary idea which I feel can not be introduced without having been passed in the Parliament, as it hits at the basic democratic procedure laid down under the constitution, and hits at its basic structure, where it could land in a hypothetical never ending procedure of formation of government.It could form part of the reforms, taking care of the contingencies that could arise.

 

This is only my personal view point.

 

[Sarvadaman Oberoi]

Right to secrecy of no vote to any candidate is now before Supreme Court:   Times of India Delhi 29 Jan 2009     VOTE OR TELL Vote for no one: Centre justifies lack of secrecy New Delhi: The ballot cast by a voter indicating his preference among candidates in the fray is a secret document, but one who does not find anyone worthy of his vote has to say so in a prescribed form that bears his signature and name.    Responding to a petition challenging the constitutional validity of this provision — Section 49(O) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 — on the ground of discrimination against naysayers, the Centre surprisingly told the Supreme Court that it found nothing wrong in the rule.    The petitioner, NGO Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), may have found tacit support from the Election Commission in its endeavour to erase this inequality in law against a person who wants to cast a negative vote, but the Centre’s stand, conveyed to a Bench comprising Justices B N Agrawal and G S Singhvi by additional solicitor general Amarendra Saran, was that it required no change. The PUCL petition wanted amendment of Section 49(O) and an additional button in the electronic voting machines to allow people to register their negative vote, that none of the candidates in the fray were suitable. The petition was filed in 2004, much after the EC had written to the Centre seeking an amendment in the Representation of People Act and the Conduct of Election Rules to provide for a negative vote. Section 49(O) provides: “If an elector, after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the register of voters in Form-17A and has put his signature or thumb impression thereon as required under sub-rule (1) of rule 49L, decides not to record his vote, a remark to this effect shall be made against the said entry in Form 17A by the presiding officer and the signature or thumb impression of the elector shall be obtained against such remark.”    PUCL was challenging the portion of the provision that warrants the voter make his identity public, which was violative of the code of secrecy attached to voting.

Regards. Sarvadaman Oberoi Tower 1 Flat 1102, The Uniworld Garden, Sohna Road, Gurgaon 122018 Haryana INDIA Mobile: +919818768349 Tele: +911244227522 Website: http://www.freewebs.com/homeopathy249/ email: mob...@yahoo.co.uk

--- On Wed, 3/12/08, DALEL AHLAWAT <dalela...@gmail.com> wrote: