Doctrine of Arbitrariness under Article 14

Article 14 requires the State to treat people equally before the law and protect them against arbitrary action. In administering electoral rolls, the doctrine of arbitrariness requires inclusion, correction and deletion decisions to rest on lawful eligibility criteria and fair procedures, rather than prejudice, irrelevant considerations or administrative whim.

Constitutional limits on electoral administration

Article 14 applies to electoral authorities as it does to other State authorities. It requires both equal treatment and non-arbitrary decision-making.

• In E. P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974), the Supreme Court explained that equality and arbitrariness are opposed to each other; Article 14 therefore extends beyond checking discriminatory classifications.
• Article 325 requires one general electoral roll for each territorial constituency and prohibits exclusion, or claims to a special roll, on grounds only of religion, race, caste or sex.
• Article 326 establishes adult suffrage for Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assembly elections, subject to constitutionally permitted disqualifications.
• The Election Commission’s authority under Article 324 to supervise, direct and control electoral-roll preparation must operate consistently with constitutional guarantees and governing law.

Eligibility must be assessed on relevant grounds

The Representation of the People Act, 1950 supplies the statutory framework for voter registration. Article 14 requires authorities to apply that framework consistently to similarly situated persons.

• Under Section 19, registration ordinarily requires a person to be at least 18 years old on the qualifying date and ordinarily resident in the constituency, subject to statutory disqualifications.
• Verification must address legally relevant facts, such as age, ordinary residence and entitlement to registration, rather than stereotypes about a community or locality.
• Different verification measures must have an objective justification connected with accurate rolls; similarly situated applicants cannot be treated differently without a relevant reason.
• Equality does not require retaining an ineligible entry: accurate rolls require both inclusion of eligible electors and lawful removal of invalid entries.

Fair procedures for correction and deletion

Accuracy cannot justify dispensing with statutory safeguards. Section 22 permits correction, transposition and deletion of entries after the prescribed inquiry and safeguards.

• Before deletion on the ground that an elector has ceased to be ordinarily resident or is otherwise not entitled to registration, Section 22 requires a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
• An adverse decision should rest on verified material and intelligible reasons, enabling the affected elector to understand and challenge it.
• Section 24 provides statutory appeals against specified registration decisions, offering a means to correct erroneous inclusion, exclusion or alteration.