2020 (11) TMI 1122 - HC - Indian Laws

Direction for fresh draw of lots of 2/3rd outgoing members of the Central Council of Indian Institute of Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors (IIISLA) - Rule 3 of the Indian Institute of Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors, Regulation and Procedure for conducting the election to the Council. It is pleaded that respondent No.2 is dissatisfied with the names forwarded by president of IIISLA as retiring 1/3rd members and seeks to conduct a fresh draw of lots in order to procure a more favourable outcome. HELD THAT - There is no infirmity in the steps taken by respondent No.2 to warrant any interference in the election process. Clearly a court should not normally stall the process of formation of the Governing Body. Further it is manifest that except for a bald allegation that respondent No.2/the Election Officer have a vested interest in selecting somebody else there is no material available on record to show that respondent No.2 has not acted in a bona fide manner and as per rules and regulations. There are no reasons for this court to interfere in the completion of the election process. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Quashing the decision of the election officer for a fresh draw of lots.
2. Interpretation of the regulations for conducting elections.
3. Allegations of arbitrariness and violation of regulations by the election officer.

Analysis:
The writ petition sought to quash the decision of the election officer directing a fresh draw of lots for the outgoing members of the Central Council of the Indian Institute of Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors (IIISLA). The IIISLA, governed by the Companies Act and Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India Act, has specific regulations for membership and election procedures. The controversy arose due to the election officer's decision to redo the draw of retiring members, citing the exclusion of a deceased council member's name. The petitioners alleged arbitrariness and violation of regulations by the election officer, leading to the court's intervention.

The court noted that the election officer's actions were in line with the regulations as he sought to rectify the error of excluding the deceased member's name from the draw of lots. The court found the election officer's decision to conduct a fresh draw reasonable and not arbitrary. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the court emphasized that interference in election processes should be minimal once initiated. The court highlighted the lack of evidence supporting allegations of the election officer's vested interests or misconduct, leading to the dismissal of the petition and related applications.

In conclusion, the court upheld the election officer's decision for a fresh draw of lots, emphasizing adherence to regulations and the absence of evidence of malpractice. The judgment underscores the importance of allowing election processes to proceed without undue interference, especially in bodies governed by democratic principles. The court's decision to dismiss the petition signifies a commitment to upholding the integrity of election procedures and respecting the autonomy of governing bodies.