New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday, April 10, reiterated that neither the right to vote nor the right to contest an election is a fundamental right, holding that both are purely statutory rights that exist only to the extent conferred by law.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan made the observation while hearing an election dispute relating to the Management Committees of District Milk Unions in Rajasthan.
“It is well settled that neither the right to vote nor the right to contest an election is a fundamental right. These rights are purely statutory in nature and exist only to the extent conferred by statute,” the bench said.
The top court further drew a clear distinction between the two rights, holding that while the right to vote enables a member to exercise franchise, the right to contest is a distinct and additional right that may legitimately be made subject to qualifications, eligibility conditions and disqualifications.
The dispute arose from a challenge to certain by-laws framed by District Milk Unions in Rajasthan, which prescribed qualifications for contesting elections to their Boards of Directors. The Rajasthan High Court had struck down the by-laws, a view affirmed by a division bench.
The Supreme Court, however, set aside the High Court judgment.
The apex court held that the High Court had erred by conflating two distinct statutory rights, the right to vote and the right to contest. “The impugned by-laws operate solely in the domain of candidature and holding of office, without impinging upon the right to exercise franchise. The very premise of the High Court’s reasoning is therefore fundamentally flawed and unsustainable in law
,” the bench said.It also faulted the High Court for passing a wide-ranging ruling without hearing all affected District Milk Unions, saying the decision violated the foundational principle of natural justice – audi alteram partem, or the right to be heard.
This post was last modified on April 11, 2026 2:46 pm