- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 25.06.2007 passed by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court in Writ Petition (C) Nos. 9013 of 2006 and 1071 of 2007 whereby the High Court dismissed the petitions filed by the appellant herein.
(3.)Brief Facts:
(a) The case relates to distribution of free gifts by the political parties (popularly known as 'freebies'). The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)- Respondent No. 8 herein, while releasing the election manifesto for the Assembly Elections 2006, announced a Scheme of free distribution of Colour Television Sets (CTVs) to each and every household which did not possess the same, if the said party/its alliance were elected to power. The Party justified the decision of distribution of free CTVs for the purpose of providing recreation and general knowledge to the household women, more particularly, those living in the rural areas. In pursuance of the same, follow up actions by way of enlisting the households which did not have a CTV set and door to door identification and distribution of application forms were initiated.

(b) This Scheme was challenged by one S. Subramaniam Balaji-the appellant herein, by way of filing writ petition before the High Court on the ground that the expenditure to be incurred by the State Government for its implementation out of the State Exchequer is unauthorized, impermissible and ultra vires the Constitutional mandates. The appellant herein filed a complaint dated 24.04.2006 to the Election Commission of India seeking initiation of action in respect of the said promise under Section 123 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (in short 'the RP Act'). The appellant herein also forwarded the complaint to the Chief Election Officer, Tamil Nadu.

(c) The DMK and its political allies emerged victorious in the State Assembly Election held in the month of May, 2006. In pursuit of fulfilling the promise made in the election manifesto, a policy decision was taken by the then government to provide one 14" CTV to all eligible families in the State. It was further decided by the Government to implement the Scheme in a phased manner and a provision of Rs. 750 crores was made in the budget for implementing the same. A Committee was constituted, headed by the then Chief Minister and eight other legislative members of various political parties, in order to ensure transparency in the matter of implementation of the Scheme.

(d) For implementing the first phase of the Scheme, the work of procurement of around 30,000 CTVs was entrusted to Electronic Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. (ELCOT), a State owned Corporation. The first phase of the Scheme was implemented on 15/17th September, 2006 by distributing around 30,000 CTVs to the identified families in all the districts of the State of Tamil Nadu.

(e) Being aggrieved by the implementation of the Scheme, the appellant herein filed another complaint to the Chief Secretary and the Revenue Secretary pointing out the unconstitutionality of the Scheme. He also preferred Writ Petition being Nos. 9013 of 2006 and 1071 of 2007 before the Madurai Bench of the High Court of Madras alleging the Scheme a corrupt practice to woo the gullible electorates with an eye on the vote bank. By order dated 25.06.2007, the High Court dismissed both the writ petitions filed by the appellant herein holding that the action of the Government in distributing free CTVs cannot be branded as a waste of exchequer. Being aggrieved, the appellant herein has preferred this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.

Transferred Case (C) No. 112 of 2011

(f) In the month of February 2011, pursuant to the elections to the Tamil Nadu State Assembly, the ruling party (DMK) announced its manifesto with a volley of free gifts. In the same manner, the opposite party-All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) and its alliance also announced its election manifesto with free gifts to equalize the gifts offered by the DMK Party and promised to distribute free of cost the following items, viz., grinders, mixies, electric fans, laptop computers, 4 gms gold thalis, Rs. 50,000/- cash for women's marriage, green houses, 20 kgs. rice to all ration card holders even to those above the poverty line and free cattle and sheep, if the said party/its alliance were elected to power during the Tamil Nadu Assembly Elections 2011.

(g) The very same Scheme was also challenged by the appellant herein on the ground that such promises by the parties are unauthorized, impermissible and ultra vires the Constitutional mandates. The appellant herein also filed a complaint dated 29.03.2011 to the Election Commission of India seeking initiation of action in respect of the said Scheme under Section 123 of the RP Act.

(h) The AIADMK and its political allies won the State Assembly Elections held in 2011. In order to fulfill the promise made in the election manifesto, a policy decision was taken by the then government to distribute the gifts and, pursuant to the same, tenders were floated by the Civil Supplies Department for mixies, grinders, fans etc., as well as by ELCOT for lap top computers.

(i) On 06.06.2011, the appellant herein filed another complaint to the Comptroller and Auditor General of India and the Accountant General of Tamil Nadu (Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 therein respectively) pointing out the unconstitutionality of the Scheme and transfer of consolidated funds of the State for the same. In the meanwhile, the appellant herein preferred a Writ Petition being No. 17122 of 2011 before the High Court of Madras alleging the Scheme a corrupt practice and to restrain the government from in any way proceeding with the procurement, placement of tenders or making free distributions under various Schemes introduced to woo the voters. In view of the pendency of SLP (C) No. 21455 of 2008 in this Court relating to the similar issue, the appellant preferred a Transfer Petition (C) No. 947 of 2011 before this Court praying for the transfer of the said writ petition. By order dated 16.09.2011, this Court allowed the said petition and the same has been numbered as T.C No. 112 of 2011 and tagged with the abovesaid appeal.