The Delhi High Court today refused to declare as unconstitutional the practice of post-poll alliances among parties which contested elections against each other, saying "it is not within the domain of this court to legislate or issue a direction".
"In view of the legal position, post-poll alliances cannot be declared as illegal on the ground of being contrary to the manifesto of the political parties entering into the alliance and it is not within the domain of this court to legislate or issue a direction therefore, making the manifesto a legally binding document on the political party issuing the same," a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw said.
While rejecting the plea, the bench also relied on a 2013 judgement of the Supreme Court which had held that provisions of the Representation of the People Act "place no fetter on the power of the political parties to make promises in the election manifesto".
The apex court had also held that it is not for the courts to legislate what kind of promises can or cannot be made in the election manifesto.
The high court's 12-page judgement came on a PIL filed by advocate Mithilesh Kumar Pandey, who had challenged the "validity of post-poll alliances among political parties" on the ground that the same was a "breach of the promises made by them during the election campaigns".
The advocate had sought direction to prevent political parties from violating their own manifestos when such parties enter into post-poll electoral alliances to gain power on the ground that electors were being kept in the dark about it at the time of casting their votes.
The court, in its judgement, also referred to Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain's contention that if the post-poll alliances are prohibited, then in the event of a hung House/Parliament without any party having the required majority, the only option will be to conduct a re-election, which is not a feasible or a practical solution.
