Contesting from two constituencies

Polity & Governance glossary

Also called: Section 33(7) · Topic: Elections and the Electoral System · NCERT: Beyond NCERT

Meaning

Contesting from two constituencies means a candidate may stand for election from at most two constituencies in one general election or by-election to the same House. Section 33(7) of the Representation of the People Act 1951 sets this limit, and it was added in 1996 [1]. It matters because a candidate who wins both seats must give one up, which forces a costly by-election (a fresh poll to fill one empty seat). Reformers want the limit cut to one seat.

Explanation

How the rule works

  • s.33(7) of the RPA 1951, added in 1996: one person can file nominations from no more than two constituencies in the same election to the same House [1].

  • Before 1996 there was no limit on how many seats a person could contest.

  • The rule applies to a general election and to by-elections held together for the same House.

  • Why a candidate can stand from a seat far from home:
  • For the Lok Sabha, a candidate only needs to be a registered voter in any parliamentary constituency in India (RPA s.4).
  • For a state assembly, the candidate must be a voter in a constituency of that state (s.5).
  • So a leader can contest from their home seat and also from a second seat somewhere else.

What happens after a double win

  • Step 1, result: the candidate wins both seats.
  • Step 2, choice (s.70): the candidate must vacate one seat within 14 days of the result.
  • Step 3, vacancy: the seat they give up becomes empty.
  • Step 4, by-election (s.151A): the ECI must hold a by-election within six months of the vacancy.
  • Exception 1: less than one year of the member's term is left.
  • Exception 2: the ECI, after consulting the Central Government, certifies that it is difficult to hold the poll in that period.

The cost of the rule

  • Public money: every by-election is paid for by the State.
  • Voter burden: voters in the vacated seat must go to the polls again.
  • Unfair to voters: people who voted for the winner in the vacated seat lose the representative they chose.

In the Constitution and practice

  • Constitutional base:
  • Art. 327: Parliament can make laws on every part of elections to Parliament and to state legislatures.

  • Parliament used this power to make the RPA 1951, and s.33(7) is part of that Act.

  • Nature of the right:

  • The right to contest elections is a statutory right, which means it comes from a law made by Parliament. It is not a fundamental right (Javed v. State of Haryana, 2003).

  • So Parliament can limit the number of seats a person may contest, as it did in 1996.

  • ECI's reform push (2004):

  • On 5 July 2004, the Chief Election Commissioner wrote to the Prime Minister. He asked for s.33(7) to be amended so that a person could contest from only one constituency [1].
  • The ECI's other option: a candidate who wins two seats and gives one up should pay the cost of the by-election [1].

  • Parliament has not made either change.

  • Supreme Court, 2 February 2023 (W.P.(C) 967/2017):

  • The challenge: the petition asked the Court to strike down s.33(7) [1].
  • The decision: the Court refused. It held that letting a candidate contest more than one seat is a matter of legislative policy (a choice for the lawmakers, not the courts) [1].
  • The effect: only Parliament can decide whether this choice helps democracy [1].

Don't confuse with

  • Being a member of two Houses (Art. 101): s.33(7) is about contesting two seats in the same House. Art. 101 is about holding seats in two different Houses. It says no one can be a member of both Houses of Parliament, or of Parliament and a state legislature, at the same time.
  • By-election (s.151A): s.33(7) creates the vacancy. s.151A sets the time limit to fill it: six months, with two exceptions.
  • Disqualification (Arts. 102/191, RPA ss.8–11): giving up one of two seats is not a disqualification. The member chooses to leave one seat and keeps the other. A disqualified member loses the seat by law.
  • Elector qualification (RPA s.4 vs s.5): a Lok Sabha candidate can be a voter anywhere in India. An assembly candidate must be a voter in that state. This explains where a second seat can be.

Prelims Hooks

  • s.33(7) RPA 1951, added in 1996: a candidate can contest at most two constituencies. Before 1996 there was no limit [1].
  • A candidate who wins both seats must vacate one within 14 days (s.70). The by-election must be held within 6 months (s.151A).
  • ECI (5 July 2004): the Chief Election Commissioner wrote to the Prime Minister asking for "one candidate, one seat" [1].
  • Supreme Court (2 Feb 2023, W.P.(C) 967/2017): the Court refused to strike down s.33(7) and called it legislative policy for Parliament to decide [1].
  • Trap: the two-seat limit comes from a statute (the RPA 1951), not from the Constitution. The right to contest is a statutory right, not a fundamental right.
  • Trap: s.33(7) is about seats in the same House. Holding seats in two different Houses is governed by Art. 101.

Mains Points

  • The case for "one candidate, one seat":
  • A double win forces a by-election. This wastes public money and makes voters go to the polls again.

  • The ECI (2004) proposed allowing only one seat, or making the winner pay for the by-election [1].

  • The case for keeping two seats:

  • Leaders want a safe second seat in case they lose the first. Parties also use a leader's candidacy to draw votes in a new region.

  • The Supreme Court (2023) held that this is Parliament's policy choice, so reform must come through law and not through the courts [1].

  • A middle path: keep the two-seat option but make the candidate pay the by-election cost. This keeps the choice open, puts the cost on the person who causes the by-election, and discourages careless double candidacies [1].

Related concepts

Read more

Sources

  1. 1Supreme Court of India, W.P.(C) 967/2017, Order dated 02-Feb-2023 (challenge to s.33(7) RPA 1951)api.sci.gov.in · tier 1