ECI Initiates Delisting of 345 Registered Unrecognized Political Parties

New Delhi: In a significant move to streamline India’s political landscape, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has launched a nationwide initiative to delist 345 Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs) that have failed to meet critical compliance requirements. Announced on June 26, 2025, this action targets parties that have not contested a single election since 2019 and whose physical offices could not be located. This decisive step, led by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar alongside Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, aims to eliminate inactive political entities and curb financial irregularities, ensuring a cleaner and more transparent democratic system.

Why is the ECI Delisting 345 RUPPs?

The ECI’s decision to delist 345 RUPPs stems from their failure to adhere to two fundamental conditions required to maintain their registration status under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA, 1951):

1. Non-Participation in Elections: These parties have not contested any elections—be it Lok Sabha, state legislative assemblies, Union Territory elections, or bye-elections—since 2019. Electoral participation is a cornerstone of a political party’s legitimacy, and the absence of such activity over six years raises questions about their operational validity.
2. Non-Existent Physical Offices: The ECI conducted a nationwide verification exercise and found that the offices of these 345 RUPPs could not be physically traced. This lack of a verifiable presence further undermines their credibility as active political entities.

Of the over 2,800 RUPPs currently registered with the ECI, many have been identified as inactive or non-compliant. The 345 parties targeted in this first phase represent a significant portion of these errant entities. The ECI’s initiative is part of a broader effort to clean up the political system by removing parties that exist only on paper, enjoying benefits like tax exemptions without contributing to the democratic process.

The Legal Framework: Section 29A of the RPA, 1951

Under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, political parties in India are registered with the ECI, granting them privileges such as tax exemptions, access to electoral registers, and the ability to apply for party symbols. However, the RPA, 1951, does not explicitly empower the ECI to de-register a political party, as clarified in the 2002 case Indian National Congress versus Institute of Social Welfare. Instead, the ECI uses its authority to delist parties that fail to meet compliance criteria, effectively revoking their registration benefits.

Delisting differs from de-registration in that it does not permanently dissolve a party but removes it from the ECI’s official list of registered parties. Delisted parties lose privileges like tax exemptions and must reapply for registration if they wish to regain their status. This process ensures that only active and compliant parties retain the advantages of registration.

Compliance Issues and Financial Irregularities

The ECI’s crackdown on RUPPs is driven by several compliance-related concerns, particularly in the areas of financial transparency and electoral participation:

Non-Submission of Mandatory Reports

Under Section 29C of the RPA, 1951, RUPPs are required to submit contribution reports detailing their financial activities. However, many of the 345 identified RUPPs have failed to comply with this mandate, raising red flags about their operational transparency.

Financial Irregularities and Tax Abuse

The ECI has flagged serious financial improprieties among RUPPs, including:

• Improper Claims of Income Tax Exemptions: In FY 2019–20, 219 RUPPs claimed tax exemptions worth ₹608 crore, despite not participating in elections or maintaining verifiable offices.
• Fake Donation Receipts: Some RUPPs have been linked to issuing fraudulent donation receipts, undermining the integrity of political funding.
• Use of Shell Companies and Bogus Transactions: Investigations have revealed instances of RUPPs engaging in transactions through shell companies and fictitious purchases, further highlighting the need for regulatory action.

Lack of Electoral Participation

In the 2019 General Elections, approximately 70% of RUPPs did not field candidates, despite being registered. This inactivity contradicts the purpose of political party registration, which is to foster democratic participation.

ECI’s Process for Delisting

To ensure fairness, the ECI has adopted a structured approach to delisting:

1. Issuance of Show-Cause Notices: The Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) of respective states and Union Territories have been directed to issue show-cause notices to the 345 identified RUPPs. These notices provide the parties an opportunity to explain their non-compliance.
2. Hearings by CEOs: RUPPs will be allowed to present their case during hearings conducted by the concerned CEOs. This step ensures that no party is delisted without due process.
3. Final Decision by the ECI: After reviewing the responses and hearing outcomes, the ECI will make the final decision on delisting. This multi-step process reflects the Commission’s commitment to transparency and fairness.

Implications of Delisting

Once delisted, the 345 RUPPs will face significant consequences:

• Loss of Registration Benefits: Delisted parties will no longer enjoy tax exemptions, access to electoral registers, or the ability to apply for party symbols.
• Exclusion from ECI’s Official List: These parties will be removed from the ECI’s list of registered political parties, effectively stripping them of their recognized status.
• Reapplication Requirement: To regain their status, delisted parties must undergo the entire registration process anew, complying with all requirements under Section 29A of the RPA, 1951.

This action sends a strong message to political entities about the importance of adhering to electoral and financial regulations, reinforcing the ECI’s role as a guardian of democratic integrity.

Historical Context and Previous Actions

The ECI’s current initiative is not its first attempt to address the issue of non-compliant RUPPs. In 2022, the Commission conducted a similar drive, declaring 537 RUPPs inactive or delisting them for failing to meet compliance standards. The recurrence of such exercises underscores the persistent challenge of inactive or fraudulent political parties in India.

The ECI’s actions are also informed by recommendations from the Law Commission’s 255th Report (2015), which proposed automatic deregistration of parties that fail to contest elections for 10 consecutive years. Additionally, in a 2016 memorandum, the ECI suggested amending the RPA, 1951, to grant it explicit powers to de-register non-compliant parties. While these recommendations have not yet been legislated, the ECI’s delisting efforts demonstrate its proactive approach within the existing legal framework.

RUPPs vs. Recognized Political Parties

To understand the significance of the ECI’s actions, it’s essential to distinguish between RUPPs and recognized political parties:

• RUPPs: These are newly registered parties, those that have not secured the required vote percentage or seats in assembly or general elections to qualify as a state or national party, or parties that have never contested elections since registration. RUPPs do not enjoy the full range of benefits granted to recognized parties, such as reserved symbols or broadcast time on government media.
• Recognized Political Parties: These are classified as national or state parties based on their electoral performance. To achieve recognition, a party must secure a minimum percentage of valid votes or a specified number of seats in recent elections. Recognized parties receive privileges like party symbols, broadcast time, and access to electoral registers.

Currently, India has six recognized national parties and 63 recognized state parties, in addition to over 2,800 RUPPs.

Broader Impact on India’s Political System

The ECI’s delisting initiative is a critical step toward cleaning up India’s political system. By targeting inactive and non-compliant RUPPs, the Commission aims to:

• Enhance Transparency: Eliminating parties that engage in financial irregularities or exist solely to exploit tax exemptions strengthens the integrity of political funding.
• Promote Active Participation: Ensuring that only active parties remain registered encourages genuine electoral engagement and democratic participation.
• Reduce Administrative Burden: Delisting inactive parties streamlines the ECI’s registry, allowing it to focus on supporting legitimate political entities.

This move also aligns with broader efforts to modernize India’s electoral processes, such as the adoption of e-voting in Bihar for municipal elections and the special revision of the voter list in the state, which has sparked political debate.

Conclusion

The Election Commission of India’s decision to delist 345 Registered Unrecognized Political Parties marks a pivotal moment in the country’s efforts to maintain a robust and transparent democratic system. By addressing non-compliance, financial irregularities, and electoral inactivity, the ECI is reinforcing the principles of accountability and participation that underpin India’s democracy. As the delisting process unfolds, with show-cause notices and hearings ensuring due process, the initiative is poised to set a precedent for future reforms. Political parties, stakeholders, and citizens alike will be watching closely as the ECI continues its mission to clean up the political system, ensuring that only active and compliant entities shape India’s electoral future.

FAQs