Should Parliament codify a time-bound procedure for party-symbol disputes?

Paragraph 15 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 lets the Election Commission decide rival claims to a party, but fixes neither a test nor a timeline [1]. That gap surfaced when the Supreme Court asked the EC to state a "reasonable time" for deciding the AITC dispute [2]. Codification is desirable — but as a framework, not a stopwatch.

The case for codification

• Interim orders decide real elections. The EC's interim freeze bars both camps from the reserved symbol and the party name simpliciter during the current byelections [2]. Since symbols are reserved precisely to let voters identify a party without reading its name [1], a freeze shifts outcomes before any finding of fact.
• The governing test is unwritten. Para 15 requires only that the EC weigh "all available facts" after hearing both sides [1]; the "test of majority" rests on EC practice approved in Sadiq Ali (1971). The relative weight of legislative versus organisational support is therefore unpredictable — a standing invitation to litigate.
• Precedent shows prolonged limbo. The EC decided the Shiv Sena dispute by a final order of 17 February 2023 [3], yet the symbol question remained before courts for years afterwards.

Countervailing concerns

• Due process needs time. Para 15 mandates hearing representatives of both groups [1]; verifying membership rolls and office-bearer affidavits cannot be compressed arbitrarily. A rushed, thinly reasoned order simply relocates delay to the appellate stage.
• Disputes vary in scale — a national party's organisational wing cannot be audited on the same clock as a small state unit.

The answer, then, is calibrated codification: a statutory outer limit extendable only by recorded reasons, express weights for legislative and organisational strength, a duty to justify each interim freeze, and explicit use of Para 15's neglected "neither group" option [1]. Embedding this in the Representation of the People Act would give the EC predictable authority under Article 324 and protect the voter's level playing field.