Pelezoto Pius Kikhi
Kirha Village, Dimapur
With the upcoming election fever creating such chaos and suspense, private vehicles owners are now gripped with fear of their vehicles being seized for election duty by the State Government, and news have been circulated in social medias about the locations where such vehicles have been seized. I hadmy own doubts on the mentioned subject, which made me search for answers from various sources available and I want to share some of it below:
The State Government has been entitled for requisitioning of premises, vehicles, etc. for election purposes under Section 160 of The Representation of the People Act, 1951, wherein it states that: “that Government may by order in writing requisition such premises, or such vehicle, vessel or animal, as the case may be, and may make such further orders as may appear to it to be necessary or expedient in connection with the requisitioning: Provided that no vehicle, vessel or animal which is being lawfully used by a candidate or his agent for any purpose connected with the election of such candidate shall be requisitioned under this sub-section until the completion of the poll at such election.”
Section 160 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 has given a right to the State Government to requisition a vehicle in connection with an election so to be held within the State butit is also states that the requisition shall be effected by an order in writing and to the person deemed by the State Government to be the owner and/or the possession of the property in question. It is also specifically stated that such order shall be served in the prescribed manner on the person to whom it is addressed.
But in Nagaland, how far are we complying with it and how far are the owners of the property in question are aware of the procedures? I have heard of vehicles being seized from certain points of the road and for this I would like to quote from Anirban Ghosh vs Dist. Election Officer on 8 April, 2010, where it is stated “28. I have noticed above that in each case the cars were requisitioned on the road taking advantage of the authority which a police personnel wields. Cars were stopped. The drivers and/or the person driving the car was forced to part with his driving licence in all cases. In some cases the registration certificate and in some cases the tax token was taken possession of and the order of requisition was made over whereas section 160 sub- section (2) of the Act specifically provides "such order shall be served in the prescribed manner on the person to whom it is addressed". The Executive obviously if not take recourse to the manner laid down in Rule 98(supra) for service of an order under section 160 of the Act. Only a highwayman can be expected to conduct himself in this fashion. This is not expected from the Executive of a Welfare State."………..Therefore, in our considered opinion, it appears to us that it is true that the authorities have power to requisition premises or a vehicle for election purposes. But at the same time, they have to be cautious and following the rule as prescribed for requisitioned of such vehicles or premises they have to act within the four corners of the said Section. More detail is mentioned in The Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Lastly, I am wondering when we have commercial vehicles associations, who the government can contact for requisition of vehicles for election duty (which may be more than sufficient), why do they still find it comfortable to seize private vehicles. I hope some appropriate bodies, organization(s)or person(s)in the concern matter enlighten the public on the mentioned issue and make the public aware of its rights and responsibilities, so that we are not left with confusion.
