Chandigarh, May 23 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court on Friday dismissed a batch of public interest litigations (PILs) seeking the use of electronic voting machines (EVMs) instead of ballot papers for the May 26 municipal elections in Punjab, holding that it was too late to interfere as the election process had reached an advanced stage. The elections are scheduled for municipal corporations, municipal councils and nagar panchayats across the state. The counting will take place on May 29. Among the petitions was one filed by Mohali-based advocate Ruchita Garg, who challenged the Punjab state election commission's (SEC) decision to conduct the polls through ballot papers. The petitioners argued that EVMs would ensure greater transparency and efficiency in the polling process. "As per Punjab Municipal Election Rules, 1994 the electronic voting machines (EVMs) are the only mode through which voting can be made and counted. Despite ample opportunity before the SEC for requisition of EVMs for municipal elections in the State of Punjab, no effort was made to expedite the process," the petition filed on May 19 had alleged, seeking court's intervention. A bench led by chief justice Sheel Nagu and comprising justice Sanjiv Berry observed that the last date for withdrawal of candidature had already passed on May 19 and only polling remained. The court declined to intervene at this stage and dismissed the petitions. "It is now too late in the day for us to pass any order or issue any writ, since the election programme was published as early as on May 13, and these petitions came to be filed as late as on May 18 and May 19. Arguments in the present petitions were heard and concluded on May 21. The election programme of municipal elections has progressed to an advanced stage, where the last date for withdrawal of candidature was May 19 and now the only stage left is of polling on May 26, and thereafter counting on May 29," the bench observed. The controversy over ballot papers versus EVMs had earlier triggered a blame game between the SEC and the Election Commission of India (ECI). The SEC had initially claimed that the ECI informed it that EVMs were unavailable for the civic polls. The ECI, however, disputed the claim, saying its guidelines require requisition of EVMs at least six months before elections, while Punjab sought them only in January this year. The ECI informed the court on Thursday that, despite the delay, it had arranged EVMs under "extraordinary circumstances" by sourcing them from neighbouring Rajasthan on May 21 for handing over to the Punjab SEC. Advocate Prateek Gupta, appearing for the ECI, told the court that the machines could still be commissioned in time and state staff would require only 15 minutes of training to operate them on polling day. The SEC, however, opposed any shift to EVMs at the last minute, arguing that all preparations for the elections had already been completed and political parties had not been consulted on the change. Its counsel, Aayush Sarna, also raised concerns over possible malfunctions and ongoing public controversies surrounding EVMs. The SEC further submitted that zila parishad elections held around five months ago were successfully conducted through ballot papers without any major complaints. Sarna also informed the court that printing of ballot papers had begun immediately after the nomination process ended and around Rs.50 lakh had already been spent on the exercise. Appearing for the state government, Punjab advocate general MS Bedi also opposed the PILs, arguing that they were not maintainable. He had cited the constitutional bar contained in Article 243ZG(b) that bars interference by courts in the electoral process. The court noted EVMs were introduced in 2006 by adding Section 48-A of 1994 rules, which merely provided the composition of EVMs. However, while adding section 48-A the statute retained the provisions relating to ballot papers and ballot boxes, which is evident from the rules. It further said that the reason for retention of the provisions relating to ballot papers and ballot boxes is quite obvious. "In our society, where illiteracy, poverty and ignorance continue to plague a large section of society, the Rule making authority intentionally retained the provision of ballot papers and ballot boxes and did not omit the same, while introducing the concept of EVMs in municipal elections. There may be occasions where the Election Commission of India or the state election commission may have to revert back to the traditional mode of ballot papers and ballot boxes. As such, the provision for the same in the Rules were and are understandably retained," the bench observed. As the court dismissed the petitions, it gave liberty to the petitioners to challenge the elections by filing petitions post elections....