Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) 18 Hence, the petitioner has challenged the Impugned Notification on the following grounds, (i) That Impugned Notification is arbitrary and liable to be set aside insofar as the same is illegal and unconstitutional. (ii) That the Impugned Notification is a violation of the Petitioner's fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 & 21 of the Indian Constitution. (iii) That the Impugned Notification is liable to be set aside in so far as the Impugned Notification actively discriminates against independent candidates like the Petitioner herein. While major political parties have the financial bandwidth necessary to conduct and compete in re-elections, independent candidates like petitioner will not have the financial capacity to take part in the electoral process once again. The petitioner is a man of meagre means and has taken part in the electoral process at his own expense and cost, and cannot be made to suffer due to the alleged corrupt actions of another. Therefore, the Impugned Notification is discriminatory against independent candidates like the Petitioner, is a colourable exercise of power that falls afoul of Article 14 of the Constitution and is liable to be set aside. (iv) That the Impugned Notification is liable to be set aside in so far as it fails to achieve the objectives of preventing corrupt practices, and in fact enables them. It is http://www.judis.nic.in humbly submitted that if elections are rescinded on the