Answer

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has initiated the de-listing of hundreds of Registered Unrecognised Political Parties (RUPPs). These parties are registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 but fail to meet recognition criteria. The move aims to ensure transparency, accountability, and electoral integrity.

Rationale Behind ECI’s De-listing of RUPPs

• Curbing Letter Pad Parties: Many RUPPs neither contest elections nor maintain offices and exist only on paper, creating administrative clutter.
  Eg. In June 2025, the ECI issued show-cause notices to 345 inactive RUPPs for not contesting elections since 2019.
• Preventing Tax Misuse: RUPPs enjoy income tax exemptions under Section 13A of the Income Tax Act, which are often misused.
  Eg. Over 92% of RUPPs failed to submit audited accounts in 2019–20, raising red flags over funding.
• Streamlining Electoral Records: The delisting helps maintain an authentic registry of genuinely active political parties.
  Eg. In 2022, 86 parties were found non-existent and 253 inactive, and were delisted accordingly.
• Improving Compliance and Accountability: Only parties that follow norms like filing returns and contesting polls remain eligible for benefits.
  Eg. Several RUPPs in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal were recently served notices for failing to meet ECI requirements.

Challenges in De-listing RUPPs

• Limited Legal Authority: The ECI can only de-list parties from benefits, not deregister them completely.
  Eg. The Supreme Court (2002) clarified that the ECI lacks the power to cancel party registration.
• High Administrative Burden: Verifying thousands of parties across states strains ECI resources.
  Eg. As of 2024, over 2,800 RUPPs exist, requiring extensive field verification by State CEOs.
• Risk of Litigation: Parties may challenge the de-listing in courts, causing delays and procedural hurdles.
• Perception of Political Bias: Ensuring uniform action across all states without partisan influence remains difficult.
  Eg. Some parties allege that only certain regions face strict scrutiny, undermining the neutrality of the process.

Way Forward

• Amend Election Laws: Grant the ECI powers to fully deregister non-compliant parties under the Representation of the People Act.
  Eg. The 255th Law Commission Report and ECI’s 2016 proposal recommended such powers after prolonged inactivity.
• Link Tax Benefits to Compliance: Income tax exemptions should be given only after verified filing of returns and electoral participation.
  Eg. In 2022, raids in Maharashtra and Gujarat exposed tax misuse by multiple shell political outfits.
• Empower State CEOs and Strengthen Digital Verification: Equip State CEOs to conduct physical and digital verification of party offices.
  Eg. In Rajasthan, 7 RUPPs were delisted in 2022 after field-level checks confirmed non-existence.
• Public Transparency Portal: Create a public registry of all active, inactive, and delisted parties with updated compliance data.
  Eg. The ECI has proposed a digital dashboard to track RUPPs’ performance and regulatory status in real-time.

The ECI’s bold action to de-list inactive RUPPs is a step towards a cleaner and more transparent electoral system. For lasting impact, legal reforms, tax scrutiny, administrative strengthening, and public transparency must converge. This will uphold the integrity and credibility of India’s democracy.

DOWNLOAD PDF