voters party bharat gandhi 20.03.2011

8/4/2019 Voters Party Bharat Gandhi 20.03.2011

1/45

LIST OF DATES & EVENTS

DATES EVENTS

12.01.1994: In 1994 a non-political Association in the name of National

Foundation for Education and Research (NAFER in short)

was formed and registered under Society Registration Act,

1860 at Allahabad.

23.03.2003: A wing of NAFER named Voters Party was formed as a

non-political Association in 2003 at Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.

The aims and objectives of Voters Party was to educate the

Voters of India for their Fundamental and Democratically

Right. Since Voters Party became an organization,

evolving very competent system of Education but due to

need of approval of Parliament and State Assemblies. The

system is still waiting for Legal Rectification.

NAFER recommended the Union Government to make uniformity

between the syllabus of Universities and various examining

bodies, who runs the various competitive examination.

NAFER also recommended a new Finance Circulatory System to

educate the people, qualitatively and quantitatively. NAFER

also given the new system of certification and illegally

assessment.


2/45

2007: Under Rule 168 of Rules and Procedure of Conduct of Business

of Lok Sabha, 112 MPs of Lok Sabha had filed a petition to

the Honble Speaker of Lok Sabha and requested to Act in

favour of prayer as made in the said petition.

2008: The similar petition was also filed by 250 members of Rajya

Sabha before the Honble Vice President of India / Honble

Chairman of Rajya Sabha.

Both the petitioners are still under consideration by various

standing committee of the Parliament in the same year 33

MPs of Lok Sabha also gave notice under Rule 193 of

Rules and Procedure of Conduct of Business of Lok Sabha

to the speaker and demanded detail on those issue.

6.5.2008: The debate on demand of said 33 MPs was assured by the

Honble Speaker but one day before on 5.5.2008 the

Session of Lok Sabha was san de and the debate was

derailed.

The said issue was not taken for debate in the next session of the

Lok Sabha despite all the efforts of MPs.

In such circumstances inculcated the mistress among the

leadership of big political parties and the Members of the


3/45

FEFM and Voters Pension Party concluded to contest direct

Elections and submit their findings before the Electorate.

It was also decided that the name of Voters Pension Party should

be amended.

..: That the name of Voters Pension Party was therefore changed as

VOTERS PARTY in December 2008. The manifesto of

the Party was declared and some followers of the Voters

Party contested Lok Sabha Election in April 2009. The

Experiences came that all the contestants were treated as

Independent Candidates by the Election Commission of

India.

This event of Parliament and the behavior of Core leaders of big

Political Parties avoid the members who were working since

last 10 years for the political reforms and for Parliamentary

approval of Fundamental Economical Right of the Voters.

Members therefore reached in the conclusion that the wide

separate Poverty is not the output of mental and physical

weakness of the poor people but the poor people are

reserved to work against nominal earning just for their

bread and butter which is nothing but slavery. Such

practice is stringently maintained by (various) Laws,

traditions and assumption of the Governance. Such

superstitions could never be able to eliminate even after


4/45

1000 years. It is also concluded by the members that a big

part of lower level cadre of about every big political parties

including MPs and M.L.As are ready to favour the findings

of the NAFER, but the core leaders of the big parties are

not ready to even listen and talk on the issue of Political

reforms. Neither they are ready for discuss on this issue

within their party nor they are ready to permit there MPs

and MLAs for debate on the floor of the Parliament.

Members of the Association were bound to form a new

Political Party at this stage, when all the ways are looked

closed.

October 2009: The Election Commission asked whether the Voters

Party is registered body or not. The petitioner replied

that Voters Party was functioning under social

organization named NAFER, which is a Registered

Society. The petitioner expected by the Commission

that the Commission will not register the said name, if

the Voters Party is proved to be a registered body.

13.12.2009: That some members of the NAFER and FEFM and Voters

Party therefore dissolved the running Voters Party, formally

known as Voters Pension Party on 13.12.2009 and

constructed a draft a competent Constitution of a new

Political Party and also wanted to register the said Party

with Election Commission of India.


5/45

The said New Committee therefore, drafted the New Constitution

of the New Political Party and applied before Election

Commission of India on 1.1.2010 the Committee also

decided that the name of the New Political Party must be

the same as Voters Party to avoid any confusion amongst

its members followers and supporters who were already

working and supporting the issue of Political Reforms under

the banner of non-political organization and Voters Pension

Party as well as Voters Party.

13.03.2010: An objection was filed by Election Commission of India for

not registering VOTERS PARTY in the name of anybody

also except the petitioner as the petitioner are to know that

someone has applied for Registration of Political Party in

the name of Voters Party with a malafide intention of

using the reputation, goodwill and public support of the

petitioner Organization as well as misuse the name of

Voters Party. In such case the petitioner can be

blackmailing. The petitioner also annexed supporting

documents regarding existence and activities of Voters

Party for the period of last several years.

The petitioner organization also realized that the

Association of Voters Party shall be registered as a


6/45

Political Party with the Election Commission of India to

protect the name, Voters Party and its ideologies from

misusing by others.

That NEFAR therefore dissolved its Political Education

Wing named Voters Party and suggested those members

to form a Political Party and get it registered with the

Election Commission of India. The name of said Political

Party anonymously selected as Voters Party. Since

Voters Party became a Political Party independently.

That the petitioner applied for registration of said political

party named Voters Party duly annexed the required

documents like Voters Card and affidavits of 100 members

of different States along with its Constitution and fees as

per section.

That Election Commission of India raised objection to

register Voters Party will this misconception that the party

has already been existing for the period of more than 30

days hence it can not be registered with the commission as

a Political Party under Rule.

The Election ought to have consider that the Constitution of

Voters Party was formed on 1.1.2010, which was clearly

mentioned and annexed with the application for Registration


7/45

of Voters Party prior to 1.1.2010 it is a social organization

working and functioning as a wing of a Registered Society

named NAFER. There was no independent constitution.

[ABOVE LIST OF DATED NOT YET CORRECTED]

MAKE IT FINAL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


8/45

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.__________OF 2011

In the matter of:

VOTERS PARTYThrough: Secretary General, Sh. Asit Kumar Roy289, Patiala House, New Delhi 110001. . PETITIONER

VERSUS

1. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAThrough its SecretaryNirvachan Sadan,Ashoka Road,New Delhi.

2. VOTERS PARTY [Regd.]Through Its Gen. Secretary

..

. RESPONDENTS

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF

INDIA IN FOR ISSUE OF A WRIT, ORDER[S], DIRECTION[S]

THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE

RESPONDENT TO REGISTER THE PETITIONERS

ORGANISATION VOTERS PARTY AS A POLITICAL PARTY

UNDER SUB SECTION (4) SECTION 29A OF

REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT 1951

AND

FOR A DIRECTION, ORDER OR WRIT OD MANDAMUS,DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CANCEL THE

REGISTRATION OF SO CALLED VOTERS PARTY WHICH IS

ALREADY REGISTERED IN FAVOUR OF A BOGUS

ORGANISATION, [RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN]

AND/OR


9/45

FOR A DIRECTION, ORDER OR WRIT OF MANDAMUS,

DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO REMOVE THE

PROVISION THAT AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF

A POLITICAL PARTY SHOULD BE MADE WITHIN THE PERIOD

OF 30 DAYS NEXT FOLLOWING FROM THE DATE OF

FORMATION OF THE SAID PARTY.

AND/OR

ANY FURTHER ORDER[S] DIRECTION[S] IN FAVOUR OF THE

PETITIONER WHICH THIS HONBLE COURT DIM FIT AND

PROPER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE

CASE AND INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Petitioner, the original organization, applied for

registration of Voters Party as a political Party before the

Respondent No.1, Election Commission of India, which was

later on rejected with the ground that the Petitioner had not

applied for registration within the time of 30 days from the date

of its foundation. During correspondence, the Petitioner came

to know that the name Voters Party was registered in favour

of Respondent No.2, a new and bogus organization.

Therefore, by the way of this petition the petitioner is

challenging the letter of the respondent vides No.

56/34/2010/PPS-I/517 dtd. 22.07.2010 whereby the


10/45

respondent has refused to register the petitioner as a political

party. The effective part of the said letter is to read as under:

you have claimed that your party was

a non-political association and you have formed

it as Political party on 01.01.2010. You have

further stated that many candidates contested

the election with the name of (Voters Party), the

wing of NEFAR and that since it was not apolitical party, these candidates were treated as

independent. Your statement is still

contradictory as on one side you are claiming

that the party was formed on 01.01.2010 and on

the other hand you stated that many candidates

contested the election under this name, prior to

formation of this party. It is evident from above

that your party was not formed on 01.01.2010

but on some earlier date. Since your application

is not make within a period of 30 days next

following the date of formation. Your

application is rightly treated as time barred.

2. That the Petitioner also challenged the action, omission and

commission of the Respondent No.1 whereby the Respondent

No.1 illegally registered Voters Party in favour of Respondent

No.2, a bogus organization, despite several objections of the

Petitioner and knowingly that the petitioner is the original, old and

parent organization of the Voters Party.

HISTORY OF VOTERS PARTY


11/45

3. That on 12.01.1994 a non-political Association in the name of

National Foundation for Education and Research (NAFER in

short) was formed under the leadership of one Bharat Gandhi and

registered under Society Registration Act 1860 at Allahabad.

Copy of Registration Certificate is annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-P-1 page -

4. That on 23.03.2003 Voters Pension Party was formed as a non-

political Association in 2003 under the leadership of Bharat

Gandhi at Meerut by Committee of aforementioned organization,

NAFER. The Aim and Objects of Voters Pension Party was to

educate the Voters of India for their Fundamental and

Democratically Right. This organization evolved very competent

system of Education but due to need of approval of Parliament

and State Assemblies. The system is still waiting for Legal

Rectification. This organization [Voters Pension Party of NAFER]

recommended the Union Government to make uniformity between

the syllabus of Universities and various examining bodies, who

runs the various competitive examination. This organization

[Voters Pension Party of NAFER] also recommended a new

Finance Circulatory System to educate the people, qualitatively

and quantitatively. This organization [Voters Pension Party of

NAFER] also given the new system of certification and illegally

assessment.

Another main issue of Voters Pension Party was to provide

Pension to Voters of India [every citizen of India], which is called


12/45

Votership. Education can not be provided to the poor people

until they have food to survive. This is an economical rights from

the Government to each and every citizen. In is important to

mention herein the concept of Votership. Hundreds of

movements, activities were going on under the leadership of Mr.

Bharat Gandhi for each and every citizen with the following aims

and objectives:

Concept of Votership (Main Points)

A. That, Votership is a newly coined word like

scholarship to denote a part of GDP and a part of per

capita income in form of cash to be received regularly

by every voter as his or her birthright.

B. That, petitioners define Votership (in HindiMatadatavritti) as a part of per capita production and

as a part of per capita income of Union of India, to be

received regularly in form of cash by each and every

voter who is enrolled on electoral roll prepared by

Election Commission of India for the elections of Lok

Sabha, by ATM cash card or by any other similar

transparent means, as their share in gross national

inherited wealth and in the collective wealth

produced by collective enterprise of voters, as a

mechanism-

to enhance the dignity of work of individual in

place of the dignity of birth status;

to compensate citizens who are suffering from

the world consumers, world traders and from

the policies of World Trade Organization, WTO;


13/45

to create fifth pillar in the building of democracy

adopting the new structure of power and of laws

based on the principles of economic democracy

and vertical separation of power;

to provide opportunity for full exposure of

inherent shape, size and nature of society and

full development of inherent physical, mental

and spiritual strength of individual;

to connect each and every voter with the level

of prosperity of the nation;

to make fundamental right of all the voters- the

social security, the economic human right, the

right to live with dignity and the share in

average collective property.

C. That, this petition submits conception of third

category of property termed as collective property

besides the prevalent notions in economic system of

private property and public property and deems

thereon the ownership of voters. It is proposed by the

petitioners that this property should be regularly

distributed to each and every voter in form of cash

through their bank accounts.

D. That, it is experienced that only poor section (below

than average income) of society take active part in

the elections with interest. It is apparent that thissection plays more than 80% role in constituting the

parliament by voting in the elections. In fact the

parliament is mainly constituted by this section of the

society. Parliament produces Prime Minister.

Ministries and many institutions including Reserve


14/45

Bank of India are created by the Prime Minister. RBI

produces currency notes and regulates banking

network. These all institutions evolve such a politico-

economic system by which big capital attracts

smaller capital like a magnet. This system increases

trench between rich and poor. It is proved by the

analysis that if these institutions were not being in

existence, the fast capital formation and

concentration of capital in richer section of society

was not possible. Hence, it could not be denied that

there is a big role of parliament in private earning of

rich people. The share of parliament in the private

earning is neither recognized nor calculated so far.

Petitioners pray by this petition to recognize this

share and return back to voters who are mainly

responsible to constitute the parliament. In fact this

share of voter is termed Votership in this petition

and gross domestic share of parliament in private

earning is termed collective income of the country.

E. That this petition prays for distribution to all voters ina transparent manner, the collective wealth of the

country by means of A.T.M. cash card relating to their

respective accounts opened by the state in the

Reserve Bank of India.

F. That, this petition proposes unequal distribution of

the manual share and proposes equal distribution of

the share of machines in the GDP among citizens on

the basis of values of capitalism and values of

communism respectively.


15/45

G. That, this petition does not make distinction between

the voters on the basis of richness and poverty with a

view to minimize the possibilities of corruption in

distribution of collective wealth and so petition

proposes distribution of Votership to all voters not

only to the poor. But such distinction is made on the

basis of richness and poverty on account of different

capacities in payment of taxes for Votership. So that

justice is done and rationality could take place.

H. That, this petition deems it necessary for the purpose

of distributive justice, that every year in Economic

Survey of India it should be published as to what

percentage is the share of men and of machines in

GDP.

I. That, this petition demands that out of collective

property of the union, the Union Government make

available to each voter his respective share; so that

in the present age of globalization, common world

market and uncontrolled unemployment eachworkman may get opportunity to bargain about his

individual labor. So that every workman becomes

free from the compulsion to reduce cost of his labor

out of being blackmailed by hunger. And so that it

may become possible for rate of labor to be raised to

such a level that every workman gets his share out of

the prosperity of the country and every citizen get

connected with the level of economic wealth of the

country.


16/45

J. That, this petition is submitted under various rules of

chapter -10 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of

Business in the Council of States by not only one or

two but about 23 members of Council of States. Thus

it is extra ordinary and non-traditional petition, in

special context of the subject matter.

K. That, for controlling the pain of economic

discrimination perpetuated by the government

among the citizens on basis of birth and same is

increasing day by day in the current age of common

world market; i.e. globalization of market; recognizing

right to get Votership has become indispensable to

safeguard the lives of voters.

L. That, this petition believes that developments are

only means to solve the problems of humanity.

Petition also believes that a portion of taxes should

reach each and every adult citizen who is object of

the developmental activities. This petition proposes

Votership to all voters as a means to attain theobjective to share in the fruits of development.

M.That, the petitioners do not assume Votership as the

only means of social security or poverty eradication.

In fact the basic objective of Votership is to evolve a

mechanism to link every adult citizen with the level of

prosperity of the country. This objective could not be

achieved by any of the present programs and laws

like National Employment Guarantee Schemes and

other schemes related to poverty elimination and

unemployment. These schemes will not be able to


17/45

transform the present status of workmen from

domestic oxen or from domestic servant or from

reserved economic slaves for hard work to the status

of domestic citizen in real scene. The wages

determined by the market rates and by the Minimum

Wages Act could not provide the feeling of economic

freedom among the workmen. Till the poor workmen

are not free economically the expectation of a

civilized citizen from him is meaningless.

N. That dearness increases for all citizens but the

employees of govt. administration and of permanent

workers of organized sector only receive dearness

allowance, therefore dearness is source of additional

income for some citizens but for rest of people it is

like a theft or pick pocketing. Payment of Votership

by adding dearness allowance will be an opportunity

to the government to compensate loss to the citizens

and it will do the financial justice to the suffering

citizens.

O.That, the petitioners are submitting this petition

before Council of States with the assumption that on

the account of GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs

and Trade) and establishment of WTO in 1995; the

authority of union govt. for regulating market, has

become so weak that it is no longer capable of

promoting and protecting the small scale industries

and making market available for sale of their goods.

On account of this inability, it is no more possible for

government to make available jobs even to the one

forth of the people seeking jobs. Hence, in the


18/45

present age of anarchic world economic order which

has gone beyond the control of the country level

governments, the petitioners have concluded that

purchasing power could be reached to the citizens

only by providing Votership, not by the means of

remuneration for work.

P. That, on account of worldwide common market and of

continuation of fragmented state of nation-states an

imbalance between market forces and state forces

has been occurred. This crisis is resulting into

paralysis of the state. Contemporary state can think

of controlling damage created by the market but it

can do nothing. Through this petition an appeal is

made to the parliament of India to come forward to

put an end to this situation of imbalance. For this

purpose the petitioners are requesting the Council of

States to make necessary recommendations to the

govt. to initiate actions for GAPP agreement (Global

Agreement on Poverty and Peace) for establishment

of Super-national common citizenship, common

legislature, common administration, and commongoverning system to counter the damages of the

common world market.

Q.That, the said Global Agreement on Poverty and

Peace (GAPP) has also been considered to be

necessary on account of Transnational Allowance

which could be added along with Votership amount.

So that the citizens capable of meeting foreign needs

of the domestic citizens of country could develop

fraternal relation to help in decreasing the present

tension on the border of the country.


19/45

R. That economic justice by adopting the principles of

distributing means of production is only possible in an

autonomous economy but after 1995 when

international laws related to World Trade

Organization and other international treaties took

place the economy especially market has been

converted into the common market of the whole

world. Due to these new situations contemporary

economy is not an autonomous economy and

therefore principle of the distributing means of

production has become irrelevant. Since the

petitioner are well aware with the international laws

therefore, they are demanding direct distribution of

production itself through votership rather than

distributing the means of production.

S. That, the children of all doctors, engineers, IAS, PCS,

MP, and MLA does not get power of parents in

succession. While by laws of inheritance etc, made

by British Parliament and perpetuated by Indianparliament, life earning in billions of rupees and

economic authority is got by children of billionaires.

On account of such legal provisions every person gets

inspiration that it is better to be a creator of money

rather than remaining in the office for lifetime honest

and doing good work. As every person knows that

after his death only his earning of life will be

transferred to the next generation, therefore to most

of the people it does not appear to be wrong to

accumulate wealth by corrupt methods and immoral

acts.


20/45

T. That the present governmental system promotes and

encourages corruption through different rules. In this

manner the parliament gives children of rich a

reservation of richness and poverty gets reserved for

children of poor persons. The conclusion of the

petitioners is that the regular amount of Votership

may be only partially could save the children of poor

from torture of poverty and economic discrimination.

Votership may be an entail opportunity to parliament

to get panacea for its mistake and make available an

opportunity to compensate harmed party.

U. That, in the absence of any procedure regarding

political financing the economically lower segment of

society neither gets share in economic prosperity of

the country nor gets share in the political power.

Therefore, allegations of economic exploitation have

been normally made against those nation states

which have adopted democracy in present form.

V. That, for the purpose of democratic political financing

petitioners proposes that every contestant of Lok

Sabha election will get money in pro-portion to votes

obtained by him. If we assume the amount of

votership as rupees 1750 per mouth (the fifty percent

of per voter average domestic income) a constant

who obtained 1000 votes and lost election may get

rupees 1750000 annual during whole period of

current legislature. This money should come from the

one month share from the votership of the voters. In

this manner a scientific economic system will evolve


21/45

for the benefit of those people who work for society

and for the state and economically lower strata of

every communities could get representation in

political power.

W. That votership will also enable those talented

people of economically lower section of society to

share the political power. Such participation will

promote the quality of decisions of the government

and of the parliament.

X. That It is experienced that the public representatives

are responsible in real sense to the contributors of

money rather than the votes. In view of this situation

if government will bear the expenses of the elections

of only recognized parties then the responsibility of

public representatives will shift towards the

government rather than the weaker section of

society. In this way the present form of democracy

would not get rid of the allegations of economic

exploitation of majority.

Y. That, in case India adopts the proposal of Votership,

and then it will become a source of inspiration for the

rest of entire world to follow the same steps.

Z. That, the petitioners have noticed that the investors

made most investments in lands around cities and

purchased them deeming to be most profitable

investment and evicted farmers from these lands. In

hope of prices to rise of such land and properties are

kept idle. Such property is neither used by owner for


22/45

production nor any body else is allowed to do so.

This is causing negative effect on production of grains

and country is facing grave economic loss. In view of

such a situation in order to put a stop to it the

petitioners are submitting such a system of tax on

property through this petition, so that the purchasers

of the lands around cities get forced into use of these

lands and if they do not do so then their properties

automatically get transferred into the hands of

productive users of their properties.

AA. That for the maximum possible use of assets for

production and for collecting funds for votership,

petitioners are proposing a new mechanism of

evaluation of properties and a new policy of property

tax. Petitioners suggest government for making

compulsory to declare the market prices of private

property by the owners on the basis of their self

assessment. To avoid under assessment of the

properties the petitioners wish to suggest the

compulsory clause in the affidavit that the owner isbound to transfer right of ownership to that fellow

who will be ready to pay 20% extra money against

the declared property. It is very clear that this

formula of assessment will automatically declare the

gross domestic private property, which is must for the

better economic planning of the country. This

mechanism will automatically transfer the properties

in the hands of most capable productive users. The

property tax for Votership fund should be imposed

only on upper strata of society at the similar interest

rates of RBI. This policy of taxation will be more


23/45

judicious, more acceptable, more transparent and

more effective to collect the huge funds required for

Votership.

BB. That, the second source of income for the fund

of votership will be existing budget on defferent

schemes of social welfare. Petitioners believe that if

the citizen will have right to create organization and

establish private company and the law regarding

economic disparities and inheritance law in existence.

Till then no effective restriction could placed over

corruption. On the basis of this analysis the

suggestion of the petitioners is that the funds of

social welfare, which is today disbursed by

government on administrative institutions, out of that

amount share of one person could be added with

amount of Votership and sent directly to the personal

account of needy citizens regularly by adopting

appropriate method.

CC. That, the third source of income for the fund ofvotership will come from the international agencies.

On account of MDG i.e., Millennium Development

Goal like international agreements by which foreign

and international foreign agencies want to give

financial help to poor citizens of world along with

India but start avoiding from their promises on seeing

corruption prevalent in the administration of the

country. They all will have no excuse for such refusal

after opening of bank accounts of all citizens for

Votership because such agreement will be able to

send help amounts to the private bank accounts of


24/45

poor citizens directly of their share without

involvement of local governmental administration.

DD. That, prima-facie it appears that the regular

amount received by the voters will make them idle

and this will decrease the volume of production. It is

established fact and it is the rule of nature that 3% of

people of society do not like to sale their labor in

market. Keeping in view those 3% people a

presumption gets fortified that rest of 97% are also

such by nature. The human being does not survive

only for the sake of the satisfaction of the hunger of

the stomach. It is fact that the hunger of respect and

competition are also basic component of personality

of human being. This fact is accepted by many

classical economists too. Actually, the regular

income of Votership will enthuse the mental working

of the people rather than making them idle.

Consequently the beneficiary of Votership will tend to

become more productive.

EE.That, there are 8 classes in human society classified

on the basis of 8 blood Groups. It is concluded by the

petitioners that there are in existence of 8 classes of

mentality also which are by product and influenced

by above 8 Blood Groups. The AB+ and AB- class of

society have genetic basis of centripetal nature for

the purchasing power toward themselves and O+ and

O- class centrifuges the purchasing power towards

the each and every citizens. Surprisingly, it is

observed by the petitioners that among the active

supporters of the proposal of Votership, 80% people


25/45

belong to O+ Blood Group. It proves that there is a

biological basis of ideology thinking.

FF.That it is apparent that the logic of opponents of the

proposal of the Votership is neither arguments

supported by the economics nor supported by the

psychology nor born by the national interest or public

interest. In fact argument of opponents is produced

by the ideological influences of AB+ and AB- Blood

Groups and by the selfishness. In fact such

arguments are based on massive ignorance.

GG. That Indian economy will get rid from the

recession just after implementing the proposal of

Votership. This act of India will inspire other

countries of the world to adopt this proposal. It will

save the whole world from recession and from the

growth of situations of third world war.

HH. That rent of property demanded by the landlord

cannot be deemed to be a bribe. This act of landlord

cannot be deemed as improper act, or an act inspiredby his greed. The real fact is that the Votership is

share of a voter in the total rent of collective property

of the country.

II. That after a decade long deliberations with many

economists the petitioners have reached to the

conclusion that some of them are for and others

against on this proposal. Hence, there is no relation

of economics with the proposal of Votership. On

these circumstances the proposal of votership will

influence the established principles of economics. It is


26/45

not correct that the conception of Votership will be

affected by the principles of economics.

JJ. That the petitioners assume the conception of

Votership as a subject of Public Finance, rather than a

subject of economics. It is well known that Public

Finance bridges the two subjects - the Political

Science and the Economics. Hence, trusting on

opinion of only few economists is just like trusting the

advice of a cardiologist doctor on a patient suffering

from neurological disease. The petitioners conclude

that the authorized advisor on the proposal of

Votership is parliament not economists.

KK. That any legal opinion of the legal experts on

the proposal of Votership will be devoid of the

philosophical and juristic conception involved in this

proposal. Therefore, petitioner deemed it proper to

get the opinion of constitutional experts rather than

the opinion of jurists. It may be noticed that some of

the constitutional experts are included among thepetitioners.

LL. That prima-facie it appears that dearness would

increase when money of Votership will came into

market. After long deliberations with the experts of

moenitory policy, petitioners have concluded that the

per capita volume of currency produced in India is

very less than many other countries of the world.

The main presumption behind this policy is that

majority of people should be given only as much

money which is enough for their physical survival


27/45

only. It is also presumed by the policy makers that

the aforesaid money should go to the people against

the sale of their labor at the market rates. Since this

is an undemocratic and unconstitutional assumption

so that it should be obligatory to increase the volume

of the per capita currency notes issued by the RBI.

On account of this for time being it will appear that

dearness is increasing, but after some times it will

start decreasing. After implementation of the

proposal of the votership not only maximum money

will come into the market but the speed of flow of

money will also be increased. The excess money will

increase effective demand and this demand will force

establishment of new units of factories to supply the

new demand. These new units will increase the

opportunity of the employment and increase the

volume of production. This extra production will

decrease the dearness.

MM. That the resident of upper floor may drop

domestic waste of their flats at down stairs butsimilar actions can not be done by the resident of

ground floor. Similarly in fact the developed country

is in the nature of the position of the upper floor and

developing country like India is on the ground floor.

In this situation it is not proper that the people of

down floor should learn in every walk of life from the

people of upper floor. The problem of developed

countries is excess of money and problem of

developing country is shortage of money. So

votership is not solution of developed countries and

similarly the policies and principles of developed


28/45

countries could not become ideal for India like

developing country.

NN. That the petitioners are observing that there is

no any sincere and effective measure is adopted to

check the growth rate of population. It is Votership,

through which the literacy level of female will

increase and a literate female will manage the

household much sensible way. It has been already

experienced in developed and prosperous countries.

Actually, very few are realizing that population is

growing only in poor families of all caste, religion,

sect and locality of the country. In fact low income of

the family instigates to produce more children for

social security.

OO. That, the principal petitioner of this petition is

not submitting this petition to Council of States as

one of his casual activity, but it is consequential to his

research work of last twelve years. The principal

petitioner has devoted his life for getting hisVotership and for obtaining the same for all voters,

and committed to take this just activity to its

conclusion.

PP. The proposal of Votership is capable to solve

maximum problems perpetuated from very long time

and country has been facing badly. The money of

votership will check the crimes provoked by the

financial crisis and terrible scene of economic

disparities pervaded all over the society. Votership

will provide opportunity to live with dignity and


29/45

respect to more than 70% citizen who are reserved

today for hard work and low level of livelihood. The

proposal of political financing which is closely related

with votership will release the public representatives

from the burden of expenses of maintaining and

increasing social contacts. This situation will inspire

the honest persons to join the politics. The new

generation of politicians and statesmen will check

effectively the scope of corruption. Votership will

definitely inculcate national affection as the monetary

support of parents inculcates affection among the

children. The money of Votership will empower the

poor section too of society of SC and ST who are not

able to exercise the rights of reservation due to

extreme financial constraints of households in

mejority. Votership will inject the strength among

them to move towards courts against grievances

committed. Votership will safeguard the talents born

in poor families which are today killed at mass level.

Democracy will become more acceptable through

Votership. It will increase percentage of voting inelections. It will start functioning as fifth pillar in the

traditional three pillar structure of democracy.

Aspirations of preamble, of Part 4 specially article 39,

40 and 51 and of article 14 and 15 will be satisfied by

this mechanism of Votership. This money will make

available food, house, drinking water and health to

all.

[ A Book written by Bharat Gandhi on Votership can be

produced at the time of hearing before this Honble court ]


30/45

5. That in the year 2007, Bharat Gandhi made a Petitioners

committee and had filed a Petition to the Honble Speaker of Lok

Sabha along-with full consent and written support of 112 Member

of Parliaments of Lok Sabha under Rule 168 of Rules and

Procedure of Conduct of Business of Lok Sabha, and requested

to apply Votership to each and every citizen of India as their

fundamental right/birth-right, so that no-one can die for starvation

in India.

This Petition not only prays for providing share of Nation

Income from nature and Machine, directly to every citizen of

India through ATM card in lieu of several bogus defective

projects of the Government, but also prays for fixing Ceiling

of inheriting property transfer [like agricultural ceiling]. The

Petitioner is fighting for common citizenship amongst Asian

commonwealth countries to form United Nations Government

[UNG] in the place of UNO.

[ A copy of Petition published in a form of Book written by

Bharat Gandhi named Votership, which can be produced

at the time of hearing before this Honble court ]

6. That in the year 2008 the similar petition was also filed by the

Petitioner Committee under the leadership of Bharat Gandhi, with

written consent and support of 250 members of Rajya Sabha

before the Honble Vice President of India / Honble Chairman of

Rajya Sabha. Both the petitioners are still under consideration by

various standing committee of the Parliament in the same year 33


31/45

MPs of Lok Sabha also gave notice under Rule 193 of Rules and

Procedure of Conduct of Business of Lok Sabha to the speaker

and demanded detail on those issue.

7. That on 6.5.2008 the debate on demand of said 33 MPs was

assured by the Honble Speaker but one day before on 5.5.2008

the Session of Lok Sabha was san de and the debate was

derailed. The said issue was not taken for debate in the next

session of the Lok Sabha despite all the efforts of MPs. In such

circumstances inculcated the mistress among the leadership of

big political parties and the Members of the FEFM and Voters

Pension Party concluded to contest direct Elections and submit

their findings before the Electorate. It was also decided that the

name of Voters Pension Party should be amended.

8. That the name of Voters Pension Party was therefore changed

as VOTERS PARTY in December 2008. The manifesto of the

Party was declared and some followers of the Voters Party

contested Lok Sabha Election in April 2009. The Experiences

came that all the contestants were treated as Independent

Candidates by the Election Commission of India. Copy of

said.. annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-P-2 page -

9. That this event of Parliament and the behavior of Core leaders of

big Political Parties avoid the members who were working since


32/45

last 10 years for the political reforms and for Parliamentary

approval of Fundamental Economical Right of the Voters.

Members therefore reached in the conclusion that the wide

separate Poverty is not the output of mental and physical

weakness of the poor people but the poor people are reserved to

work against nominal earning just for their bread and butter which

is nothing but slavery. Such practice is stringently maintained by

(various) Laws, traditions and assumption of the Governance.

Such superstitions could never be able to eliminate even after

1000 years. It is also concluded by the members that a big part of

lower level cadre of about every big political parties including MPs

and M.L.As are ready to favour the findings of the NAFER, but the

core leaders of the big parties are not ready to even listen and talk

on the issue of Political reforms. Neither they are ready for

discuss on this issue within their party nor they are ready to permit

there MPs and MLAs for debate on the floor of the Parliament.

Members of the Association were bound to form a new Political

Party at this stage, when all the ways are looked closed.

10. That during this period the petitioner came to know that one

member of the Petitioner in collusion with other member/non-

members have applied for registration of Voters Party as a

political party before Respondent No.1, Election Commission of

India. The Petitioner forthwith gave an objection letter with all

supporting documentary proof that the petitioner is the old and


33/45

original registered organization; hence the applicant/Respondent

No.3 has no right to register Voters Party in their favour.

11. That on 17.11.2009 the Respondent No.1, Election Commission

asked the Petitioner whether the Voters Party is registered society

or organization or NGO at anywhere in India? Copy of letter dated

17.11.2009 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-P-3 page -

12. That on 11.12.2009, the petitioner replied, the Voters Party was

functioning under social organization named NAFER, which is a

Registered Society. The petitioner replied that Voters Party is

working as the political polarization branch of a Registered society

of name and fame, namely National Foundation of Education and

research (NEFER in short). Later on this organization became

famous in the name of Federation for Economic Freedom

Movement (FEFM). It is replied that Bharat Gandhi wrote a book

named ARTHIK NARSAMHAR KE KHILAF MAHABHARAT

(Struggle Against Economic Genocide) and before publishing the

contents of the book was sent to her Excellency Ms. Prathibha

Patil. The President and the Honble Prime Minister of India.

Acknowledgements were annexed as No. 12 & 13. In the said

book the manifesto of VOTERS PARTY was published, which

came to the knowledge of a person, who applied for registration of

Voters Party before Election Commission without knowledge

and consent of the Petitioner and declared Voters Party as a

political Party of Respondent No.3 on 24.08.2007 in a public


34/45

meeting at Parliament Street, New Delhi. The Petitioner forthwith

gave objection petition before the Respondent No.1/Election

Commission of India. Copy of Reply letter dated 11.12.2009 is

annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-P-4 page -

13. That the petitioner organization then realized that the Association

of Voters Party shall be registered as a Political Party with the

Election Commission of India to protect the name, Voters Party

and its ideologies from misusing by others. Therefore on

13.12.2009 the concerned members of the NAFER and FEFM

and Voters Party therefore dissolved its Political Education Wing

named Voters Party, formally known as Voters Pension Party on

13.12.2009 and suggested those members to form a Political

Party and get it registered with the Election Commission of India.

The name of said Political Party anonymously selected as Voters

Party. Since Voters Party became a Political Party independently.

The Committee then constructed a draft a competent Constitution

of as a Political Party for registration of the said Party with

Election Commission of India in the name of VOTERS PARTY.

14. That on 01.01.2010 under the leadership of Bharat Gandhi, the

original founder of NAFER and with consent of FEFM and Voters

Party formed a new committee and said new Committee

anonymously the non-political Voters Party was dissolved. The

committee also decided that the name of new political party

should be Voters Party. So the name has not been changed but


35/45

status of the organization has been since changed from no-

political party to a Political Party. The Committee decided that the

name of the New Political Party must be the same as Voters

Party to avoid any confusion amongst its members followers and

supporters who were already working and supporting the issue of

Political Reforms under the banner of non-political organization

and Voters Pension Party as well as Voters Party. The domain

name of the Voters party was registered with the petitioners and

the petitioners are owning and running the website named as

www.Voters-Party.org and www.votership.com. A bank account

also opened in the name of Voters Party. An application for

registration of Voters Party in commission was moved within 20

days from the date of formation of the party.

15. The said New Committee therefore, drafted the New Constitution

of Voters Party as a political party and applied before Election

Commission of India within 30 days time on 20.1.2010 of said

political party named Voters Party duly annexed the required

documents like Voters Card and affidavits of 100 members of

different States along with its Constitution and fees as per section.

The Constitution of Voters Party (80 pages) can be produced

before this Honble court at the time of hearing, if required.) Copy

of Application dated 20.01.2010 is annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-P-5 page -
http://www.voters-party.org/http://www.votership.com/http://www.voters-party.org/http://www.votership.com/


36/45

16. That an objection was also filed to the Election Commission of

India for not registering VOTERS PARTY in the name of anybody

also except the petitioner as the petitioner are to know that

someone has applied for Registration of Political Party in the

name of Voters Party with a malafide intention of using the

reputation, goodwill and public support of the petitioner

Organization as well as misuse the name of Voters Party. In

such case the petitioner can be blackmailing. The petitioner also

annexed supporting documents regarding existence and activities

of Voters Party for the period of last several years.

17. That on 22.07.2010 the Respondent No.1, Election Commission

of India rejected stating that the application for registration of

Voters party was not made within 30 days from the formation of

the organization, Voters Party, as many candidates contested

elections in the name of Voters Party prior to the formation of this

party as a political organization. But it is admitted by the

Respondent No.1/Election Commission that since it was not a

Political Party, these candidates were treated independent. The

Election Commission of India raised objection to register Voters

Party will this misconception that the party has already been

existing for the period of more than 30 days hence it can not be

registered with the commission as a Political Party under Rule.

The Election ought to have consider that the Constitution of

Voters Party was formed on 1.1.2010, which was clearly

mentioned and annexed with the application for Registration of


37/45

Voters Party prior to 1.1.2010 it is a social organization working

and functioning as a wing of a Registered Society named NAFER.

There was no independent constitution.

Copy of letter dated 22.07.2010 is annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-P-6 page -

18. That in reply to an application under RTI the respondent No.2

informed a member of the Petitioner that Voters Party has been

registered in favour of Respondent No.2. The Respondent No.1

did not gave any importance/value of activeness and genuineness

of the Petitioner-organization, who has been actively working,

sacrificing and fighting for social cause in the society since last 20

years for providing them Votership [Voters Pension] and

education to each and every citizen of India and the society

should be actively beneficiary, if Voters Party would be

registered in favour of the Petitioner. Copy of Reply under RTI

dated 2011 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-P-

6 page -

19. That Respondent No.1/Election commission should not issue

registration certificate to duplicate and fraud body in the same

name of Voters Party as Respondent No.1 /Election commission

was well informed and was admitted that voters Party is running

by the Petitioner.

20. That there is no any sufficient reason to fix the 30 days to apply

for registration under Respondent No.1/Elec Commission of India.


38/45

This duration should not be 3 days or 3 years. Such clause of the

Respondent No.1 debarred the poor organization of poor societies

from registration of their Association under Election Commission

of India with an ulterior motive of running India by rich and

bureaucrats, industrialists and criminals. In fact, the work of

forming an association, trust or party is initiated by a person

individually or by a very small group for getting public support and

fund, initiators spent money by their own pocket. In this phase

they work very hard. This phase may be known as experimental

stage of the association. In this phase initiators could be able to

find out the appropriate terminology and language to express their

motive and to achieve the objectives of the association. It

generally happens that for getting public support, initiators have to

change even the name of the association during experimental

stage. If initiators of association will be compelled to get their

association registered during first phase, then they will be bound

to get another association register in second stage. This

compulsion will destroy a very big part of mental, manual and

financial energy of initiators only in registration. Due to this policy

of registration work of social and political reform will suffer a lot. It

is about impossible to complete the procedure given bellow as per

the rules of the commission-

1) To contact minimum 100 persons.

2) To convince them to join party.

3) To convince them to donate funds,

4) To convince them to go district election office to get voter

certificate.


39/45

5) To collect minimum 100 copies of voters certificates,

6) To collect minimum 100 affidavites from various district andvarious states,

7) To get prepared the draft of Rs. 10, 000/-

8) To constitute the drafting committee to draft constitution of the

party.

9) To get approved the draft of the constitution by the general

assembly of the party.

10) To draft the application as per the rules provided by the

commission,

11) To submit the application in the office of the commission

within 30 days from the date of the formation of the party.

All above acts are not possible to do by any party or

association without declaring the name of the association. It is

necessary to register the name of the party first, and then the

procedure of the registration should be as simple as the

procedure of the registration of the domain name of the website.

Commission neither reserves any symbol nor provide any type of

financial help to registered parties.

20. That the condition for applying for registration within 30 days is

not imposed in other acts related to registrations like The

Societies Registration Act 1860, Trust (Registration) Act 1882,

Company (Registration) Act 1956, Partnership (Registration) Act

1860 etc. Formation of a Political Party is more difficult then the

others as referred.


40/45

21. That the Petition of the Petitioner is bonafide with the following

grounds amongst the others:

GROUNDS

A. Because letter of the respondent No.1 vide No. 56/34/2010/PPS-

I/517 dtd. 22.07.2010 whereby the respondent has refused to

register the petitioner as a political party wrong, Illegal and is bad

in law. This act of Respondent No.1 is contradictory,

discriminatory, inadequate and malpractice.

B. Because Respondent No.1/Election commission should not issue

registration certificate to duplicate and fraud body in the same

name of Voters Party as Respondent No.1 /Election commission

was well informed and was admitted that voters Party is running

by the Petitioner.

B. Because the provision of 30 days for filing application for

registration from the date of formation of a political party is

absolutely illegal, malafide, unjust and having no reasonable

excuse.

C. Because the condition for applying for registration within 30 days

carries no sufficient weight, illegal, malafide, bad in law and

unconstitutional as such condition is not imposed in other acts

related to registrations like The Societies Registration Act 1860,

Trust (Registration) Act 1882, Company (Registration) Act 1956,


41/45

Partnership (Registration) Act 1860 etc. Such bar of 30 days

debarred thousands of poor organization from poor sector of the

country and protects the organizations supported by bureaucrats,

industrialists, and criminals and/or from rich backgrounds.

D. Because it is not possible to arrange 100 affidavits, and other

documents from several states of India with 30 days after

formation of a new Political Organization practically on ground.

E. Because there is no importance, legal need and/or justification to

keep 30 days limitation for registration of a Political Party from its

date of formation except an ulterior motive to protect the rights of

poor organizations and old strong organizations from registration

as a political party for contesting election against the existing

and/or ruling parties. Such policy is hence against democracy, un-

constitutional, illegal and very bad in the eye of law.

F. Because the Respondent No.1 ought to have considered that

Voters Party of the Petitioner was functioning under NAFER, a

registered society as a non-political organization and the same

had been dissolved.

G. Because the Respondent No.1 has make a grave error in not

considering the dissolution of non political Voters Party on

13.12.2009 and a new political party was formed in the same

name on 01.01.2010. There is no bar for keeping same name of


42/45

an non-political organization and a political organization if earlier

organization dissolved.

H. Because the Respondent is empowered to review its own

decision vide letter No. 56/34/2010/PPS-I/517 dtd. 22.07.2010,

whereby the respondent has refused to register the petitioner as a

political party. and should consider application of petitioners to

register Voters Party due to two reasons-

i) Any association with the name of Voters Party was notexisting on 1st January 2010, when Petitioners VotersParty was formed.

ii) Application in commission was moved within 20 daysfrom the date of formation of the party. Hence, theapplication for registration was not time barred, as

commission has estimated.

I. Because the Respondent No.2 has make a grave error to apply

for registration of a Political Party in the name of Petitioners

organization Voters Party knowingly that the said organization is

not belonging to Respondent No.2. In fact Respondent No.2 have

cheated the Petitioner and liable to be punished for the same.

J. Because. Respondent No.1/Election Commission was well

informed and was admitted that voters Party is running from for

several years as a non-political organization for the society, but

the Respondent No.1 registered knowingly a running body in

favour of a fraud group without considering that the petitioner

formed a new political organization in the same name, Voters

Party and applied within 30 days for registration. The persons


43/45

who filed Nominations in the Elections were independent

candidates. There is no bar to fight election with the idea and

ideology of Votership and for that the petitioners party should not

be effected.

K. Because the concept/policy of the Respondent No.1 regarding

refusal of registration on the ground that some individual stood as

a candidate of Voters Party in Elections is illegal, wrong, and

baseless as the Respondent No.1 treated those candidate as

Independent Candidate, not a candidate for Voters Party. Such

act of Respondent No.1 is illegal, malafide in the premises of the

Election Commission, especially in the process of party

registration.

22. That the petition of the petitioner is bonafide and in the interest of

Justice.

23. That the petitioner has not filed any other similar petition before

the Honble Supreme Court of India and any other Courts.

PRAYER:

In these circumstances, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayedthat that this Honble Court may be pleased issue of a writ,

order[s], direction[s] the nature of mandamus,

(i) Directing the respondent to register the petitioners

organization Voters Party as a political party under sub


44/45

section (4) section 29a of representation of the people act

1951

And

(ii) Mandamus, directing the respondent no.1 to cancel the

registration of so called voters party which is already

registered in favour of a bogus organization, [respondent

no.2 herein]

And/or

(III) Mandamus, directing the respondent no.1 to remove the

provision of 30 days limitation i.e. an application for

registration of a political party should be made within the

period of 30 days next following from the date of formation

of the said party.

And/or

(iv) Any further order[s] direction[s] in favour of the petitioner

which this honble court dim fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the case and interest of justice.

:

Date : January 2011. Petitioner in Person

Place : New Delhi.


45/45

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

W.P. (C) NO.______________OF 2011

In the matter of:

VOTERS PARTYThrough: Secretary General, Sh. Asit Kumar Roy

. PETITIONER

VERSUS

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA . RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

I Asit Kumar Roy, Gen Secretary of the Petitioners organization, Voters

Party, office at 22 C/A-1, Mayur Vihar-3, Delhi-110096, do hereby

solemnly affirm and delere as under:

1. That I am petitioner of this case and know all the facts and

circumstances of the case and do hereby swear this affidavit.

2. That the present Petition has been drafted by me, which I

understand that the contents of the same from para No. 1 to are

true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

3. That the Annexure of this Petition are also correct copies of their

respective originals.

DEPONENTVERIFICATION :

Verified at New Delhi on this day of March, 2011 that the

contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my

knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT

voters party bharat gandhi 20.03.2011

Documents