UPSC Prelims 2021 Q80: Contesting from Multiple Constituencies
Consider the following statements:
1. In India, there is no law restricting the candidates from contesting in one Lok Sabha election from three constituencies.
2. In 1991 Lok Sabha Election, Shri Devi Lal contested from three Lok Sabha constituencies.
3. As per the existing rules, if a candidate contests in one Lok Sabha election from many constituencies, his/her party should bear the cost of bye-elections to the constituencies vacated by him/her in the event of him/her winning in all the constituencies.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- 1 only
- 2 only
- 1 and 3
- 2 and 3
UPSC dropped this question from evaluation.
Statement-wise explanation
- 1: incorrect — Section 33(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 limits a candidate to at most two constituencies in a general election, in a group of bye-elections, or in biennial elections to the same House. The limit was added by the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act, 1996. Before that amendment there was no cap. So a law does stop anyone from contesting one Lok Sabha election from three seats.
- 2: incorrect — Devi Lal's three-seat contest happened in the 1989 Lok Sabha election, not in 1991. In 1989 he stood from Rohtak (Haryana), Sikar (Rajasthan) and Ferozepur (Punjab). He won Rohtak and Sikar, kept Sikar, and came third in Ferozepur. In 1991 he contested only Rohtak among these seats and lost to Bhupinder Singh Hooda of the Congress. He does not appear in the 1991 candidate lists for Sikar or Ferozepur.
- 3: incorrect — No law or rule makes a candidate, or the candidate's party, pay for a bye-election caused by vacating a seat. Section 70 of the RPA 1951 only requires a person elected to two seats to give up one. The State pays for the resulting bye-election. Charging the cost to the candidate is only a proposal. The Election Commission first made it in 2004 and repeated it in 2016, but Parliament has not enacted it.
How to eliminate
Two parts of the question can be settled from basic polity. Statement 1 is false because of the well-known 'two constituencies' rule in Section 33(7) of the RPA 1951. That removes option (a) and option (c). Statement 3 uses the phrase 'as per the existing rules', but making the candidate pay for a bye-election is a reform the Election Commission has asked for and Parliament has not passed. That removes option (d) as well. The only option left needs Statement 2 to be true, and it is not: Devi Lal's three-seat contest (Rohtak, Sikar, Ferozepur) was in 1989, while in 1991 he lost Rohtak alone. All three statements are false, so none of the four options is correct, and UPSC dropped the question. The question tests recall of one date, so the facts to remember are: 1996 was when the two-seat cap came in, and 1989 was Devi Lal's three-seat contest.
Know more
Contesting from more than one seat: the legal framework
The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA) controls how many seats a candidate may stand from.
| Provision | What it says |
|---|---|
| Section 33(7) | A candidate may stand from at most two constituencies in a general election, a group of bye-elections, or biennial elections to the same House. Inserted in 1996. |
| Section 70 | A person elected to more than one seat of Parliament or a state legislature must resign all but one, or lose them all. |
| Prohibition of Simultaneous Membership Rules, 1950 | A person elected to two Lok Sabha seats has 14 days from the declaration of results to resign one. Otherwise both seats fall vacant. |
| Section 151A | A bye-election must be held within six months of a vacancy. |
Before 1996 there was no limit. Candidates sometimes stood from three or more seats, as Devi Lal did in 1989.
Reform proposals
- Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990): recommended capping contests at two seats. This became law in 1996.
- Election Commission (2004, repeated in 2016): allow only one seat per candidate. If two seats are kept, the winner who vacates a seat should deposit the cost of the bye-election. The 2004 proposal suggested Rs 5 lakh for an Assembly seat and Rs 10 lakh for a Lok Sabha seat.
- Law Commission, 255th Report (2015): one candidate, one constituency.
- Supreme Court, Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India (February 2023): refused to strike down Section 33(7). The Court held that the number of seats a candidate may contest is a matter of legislative policy for Parliament.
Why it matters: each vacated seat forces a bye-election. That means more cost to the exchequer, voter fatigue, and a constituency left without a representative for months. Prominent leaders still contest two seats; for example, both Narendra Modi (2014) and Rahul Gandhi (2019, 2024) contested two seats and won both in 2014 and 2024 respectively, then gave one up.
NCERT Concepts to Revise
- Contesting from two constituencies: Sets out the present seat limit, which is what Statement 1 claims does not exist.
- Representation of the People Act 1951: The Act whose 1996 amendment fixed how many seats one candidate may contest in a Lok Sabha election.
- By-election: Statement 3 asks who pays when a candidate vacates a seat and forces a bye-election.
- Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990): The 1990 committee whose electoral-reform recommendations shaped the seat limit tested here.