New Delhi: The Election Commission of India (EC) and the Centre told the Supreme Court on Thursday that the 2013 directive to introduce the ‘None of the Above’ (NOTA) option on ballots had proven to be a “failed idea.” They argued that NOTA has never significantly impacted any election and criticized a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that called for elections to be held even in constituencies with only one candidate, to determine whether that candidate receives more votes than NOTA.
Representing the EC, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi told the court, “NOTA has never influenced the outcome of any election. Only a minuscule number of voters have chosen this option, and all winning candidates have secured far more votes than NOTA.”
Attorney General R Venkataramani, along with Additional Solicitor General S D Sanjay, said the government agreed with the EC’s position.
During the hearing, a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh posed a significant question: “Can the Union government and the Election Commission consider prescribing a minimum percentage of votes that a candidate must secure to be declared the winner?”
The bench suggested that the government could consider forming an expert panel—including parliamentarians and subject matter specialists—to discuss the matter. “Since our Constitution envisages a democracy based on majority rule, wouldn’t it be logical for the winning candidate to achieve a minimum threshold of votes, as may be determined by Parliament?” the court noted.
In response, Attorney General Venkataramani said the Election Commission had already examined the issue extensively in its report on ‘One Nation, One Election’. The report had been discussed in Parliament, but no consensus was reached due to divergent opinions.
Justice Kant observed that the situation addressed by the PIL was largely hypothetical—where a sole candidate might receive fewer votes than NOTA if an election were conducted instead of declaring the candidate elected unopposed.
In its affidavit, the EC emphasized the rarity of uncontested elections. “Since 1991, only one candidate has been elected unopposed to the Lok Sabha. Over the past 54 years, there have been only six such uncontested elections,” Dwivedi stated. “Across 20 general elections since 1951, there have been just nine instances of uncontested seats.”
Responding to the PIL filed by the NGO ‘Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy’, which called for elections even with a single candidate in the race, the EC noted that increased political participation and voter awareness have drastically reduced the likelihood of uncontested elections. “This is reflected in the data, and therefore, the Supreme Court should not entertain this petition,” the EC said.
The Commission further clarified that the NOTA option is applicable only when an election is conducted. “To treat NOTA as a default contesting candidate in uncontested elections is not supported by current laws. Doing so would necessitate legislative amendments to the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961,” the affidavit stated.
