The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition by the Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party challenging the Election Commission’s move to relax its norms governing the counting of postal ballots in Andhra Pradesh, reported Live Law.

The dispute concerns the validity of about five lakh votes in Andhra Pradesh that have been cast through postal ballots by individuals who were unable to do so at polling booths. Andhra Pradesh is one of the four states where Lok Sabha elections and Assembly elections were held simultaneously.

As per the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, all postal ballots must be mailed with three covers, namely Form 13A, Form 13B and Form 13C.

Form 13A is a declaration that must be signed by the voter and then attested by an authorised officer. It must contain the authorised officer’s designation, signature and seal.

On Thursday, the chief electoral officer in Amravati, Andhra Pradesh, had issued a circular stating that if a voter’s Form 13A contains only the attesting officer’s signature and not the designation and seal, it should still be accepted as a valid vote.

The party approached the top court after the Andhra Pradesh High Court on Saturday dismissed its plea seeking that this circular be set aside and that the counting of votes in the state, on June 4, be done as per the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.

The Supreme Court bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Sandeep Mehta held that the High Court was right in declining to interfere with the Election Commission’s decision. “In the facts and circumstances of this case, we do not find any merit,” the bench observed.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who appeared for the petitioner, argued that the rules were changed through a circular by the Election Commission on May 30 and were applicable only to Andhra Pradesh.

Singhvi contended that anybody could scribble a signature on a voter’s Form 13A, and that relaxing norms for the requirement of the seal and designation of an authorised officer could lead to “mischief”. He argued that a circular cannot override the Election Commission’s statute.

“Attestation can’t be there with a scribble,” Singhvi told the Supreme Court. “There has to be stamp and seal of the officer.”

The YSR Congress had told the High Court that such a move would violate Article 14 of the Constitution, which promises all citizens equality before the law. It claimed that “grave prejudice would be caused” to it if illegal votes were taken into account due to the Election Commission’s move to relax the norms for postal ballots.