Talk:49-O

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject_India This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
This article is maintained by the Indian politics workgroup.
More information about this article...
⚖
Law Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
??? This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale.

Bearian 02:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] This is a hoax

This piece of junk is being forwarded through emails and 'scraps' throughout the net. But the information contained in this is partial and untrue when considered as a whole. I request the deletion of page or changing the title to 49-O hoax with a redirect, as the case may be.

Section 47.1 of HANDBOOK FOR CANDIDATES[1] released by Election Commission of India in 2007 says
"If an elector, after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the Register of Voters (Form 17A) and he has put his signature/thumb impression on that register, decides not to record his vote, he shall not be forced or compelled to record his vote. A remark to the effect that he has decided not to record his vote – “Refused to Vote” - shall be made in the remarks column against the entry relating to him in the Register of Voters by the Presiding Officer and the signature or thumb impression of the elector shall be obtained against such remark under rule 49-O. It shall not be necessary to make any change in the serial number of the elector or of any succeeding elector, in column 1 of the Register of voters."

Section 49-O of THE CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS RULES, 1961 [2] released by the Ministry of Law & Justice, India says
"Elector deciding not to vote.-If an elector, after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the register of voters in Form-17A and has put his signature or thumb impression thereon as required under sub-rule (1) of rule 49L, decided not to record his vote, a remark to this effect shall be made against the said entry in Form 17A by the presiding officer and the signature or thumb impression of the elector shall be obtained against such remark."

NOWHERE it is written that, these types of votes are counted or will be a deciding factor in determining the results of the election and the concept is illogical too.

Consider the following example[3] of a constituency of 20000 voters.

Let us say the results are like this

Candidate A- 7000 Candidate B – 6999 Candidate C - 2000 NO VOTE ( under section 49-O) – 2 People who did not come to vote – 3999

Total = 20,000

In this case as per Rule above the election should be invalid ,By just 2 people deciding to exercise the said option.The whole election is declared invalid and candidates A , B , C are rejected is nonsense . On what basis is A , B and C rejected .

--pR@tz (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


I added the hoax tag --pR@tz (talk) 16:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the hoax tag can now be removed since the factually incorrect bit has been removed. It is true that Rule 49(O) of the Conduct of Elections Rules permits one to abstain from voting. It is important to inform people about this. It is also important to alert them to the hoax that the number of abstaining votes has any legal consequences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.180.249 (talk) 10:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


[1] http://www.eci.gov.in/ElectoralLaws/HandBooks/Handbook_for_Candidates.pdf
[2] http://lawmin.nic.in/ld/subord/cer1.htm
SOURCE http://www.abhilash.in/blog/2007/01/india-and-49-o-no-vote-one-day-morning.html