Panaji, April 2 The Bombay High Court completed hearing arguments on Thursday regarding two petitions filed against the upcoming by-election for the Ponda assembly seat in Goa, according to the lawyer representing one of the petitioners.
The bench, comprising Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit Jamsandekar, heard arguments on behalf of the petitioners, the state, and an intervener, he said.
The by-election to the Ponda constituency, necessitated by the death of the then state agriculture minister Ravi Naik, is scheduled for April 9.
The petitioners, who are voters from the Ponda constituency, have argued that the newly elected MLA will have a tenure of less than a year, which they claim is against the law. The petitions state that the legislator should serve a term of at least one year.
The next assembly elections in the coastal state are due in March 2027.
The bench has reserved its order for the next date, after arguments over the matter were concluded, said Nitin Sardesai, representing Ankita Kamat, one of the petitioners.
The challenge is based on the grounds that this by-election is "blatantly illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional," Sardesai said.
"The law requires that if a seat held by an elected member falls vacant during their term, a by-election must be held within six months. However, it states that if the remaining term of that vacancy is less than one year, you cannot hold an election," he said.
Sardesai said the petitioner has pointed out that although MLA Naik passed away in October 2025, the election for the seat is being held on April 9, 2026.
Since the current assembly's term runs only until March 2027, the new MLA will have about ten months in office, counting from May, he said.
"Although elections are held within six months of the occurrence of a vacancy, the incumbent will not have more than a year. This is unnecessarily causing a loss to the treasury," he said.
Sardesai said the Election Commission of India feels that since Naik passed away in October 2025, the tenure should be counted from the time when the seat fell vacant.
The petitioner disagrees with this reasoning, he said. "The government has not filed any affidavit," he added.
