AP HC dismisses plea against medical council elections, cites statutory remedy

Amaravati: Holding that it cannot intervene under its extraordinary jurisdiction, the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed the plea challenging the election of members to the State Medical Council, observing that any grievance regarding alleged irregularities or illegalities must be pursued through the statutory appellate mechanism provided under the norms rather than a writ petition.

Single Bench Justice Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda observed that once the election process is completed and results are declared, any challenge over alleged irregularities or illegalities cannot be made through a writ petition but must follow the statutory alternative legal remedy under Rule 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Medical Council (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1978.

The bench was hearing a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus to declare the election of thirteen members to the Andhra Pradesh Medical Council (Respondent No. 4), conducted pursuant to the Gazette Notification dated 19.01.2026 through Respondent No. 7 (APTOnline Limited), as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of the Andhra Pradesh Medical Practitioners Registration Act, 1968 and the relevant Election Rules.

The petitioners’ counsel submitted that under the e-voting manual, each voter was required to use three OTPs to cast their vote. The third OTP was meant to confirm and complete the voting process, after which the voter would no longer be able to log in or vote again. However, it is alleged that, due to complaints about difficulties using the third OTP on the day of voting, this requirement was removed after the voting process had already begun.

The counsel argued that removing the third OTP created the possibility of voters logging in again and casting multiple votes, which is against the procedure. Therefore, the petitioners contended that the election should be suspended on two grounds: (1) Change of rules/voting process after starting the game/voting process cannot be allowed, and (2) by changing that rule and allowing the possibility of multiple votes by interested members may cause unfair practices in the election by interested candidates.

Based on these grounds, the petitioners, who are contesting candidates, have sought to set aside the entire election and requested that fresh elections be conducted with greater transparency and strict adherence to the APMC e-Voting Manual for Voter-2026.

On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader submitted that under Rule 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Medical Council (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1978, a statutory appeal is available to challenge any alleged irregularities or illegalities in the conduct of elections relating to Respondent No. 4. He argued that such an appeal lies before the Government, which is the appropriate forum to examine and decide all issues raised by the petitioners.

He also submitted that in view of the plea of the petitioners seeking to preserve the entire electronic record relating to e-Voting -2026 in respect of Respondent No.4 pursuant to the Gazette Notification dated 19.01.2026, should be preserved as required and the same was contemplated as per the Rule17 of Rules, 1978.

After examining the matter, the Court noted that the election to the 4th Respondent Council was conducted online, completed on 09.02.2026, and the results were declared on 10.02.2026. It further observed that the Returning Officer had already submitted the complete election results to the Government, following which Respondent No. 3 issued a Gazette Notification declaring the elected candidates as members of the Council.

It held,

"It is settled principle of law that once the election was already completed and declared the contesting candidates, the voter can challenge the election on the guise of irregularities or illegalities only by way of alternative method but not by way of writ of mandamus. This Court cannot proceed further to redress the grievance of the petitioners under extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court."

Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioners to avail the statutory remedy available under Rule 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Medical Council (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1978.

"… on perusal of the Rule-19 as extracted above, the petitioners are entitled to avail statutory appeal before the 3rd Respondent within reasonable time if the petitioners intended to challenge the same. After such appeal the 3rd Respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as early as possible. However, this Court inclined to direct the Respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5 to comply the Rule 17 to preserve, secure and maintain, in their original form, all electronic records and digital artefacts connected with APMC e-Voting 2026 carried out pursuant to the Gazette Notification dated 19.01.2026 for a period of six months or till further orders in appeal filed by the petitioners", the bench concluded.

To view the court order, click on the link below:

Also read- AP Medical Council 13-member election results out; 55 percent doctors voted