How should registered unrecognised political parties be regulated?
Six little-known Gujarat parties reported more donations than five national parties. Who keeps watch on such parties?
Published 11 September 2026. Written by Pratidin from the reports linked at the end; every fact checked by a separate review before publishing. How we work
An explainer in The Hindu on 11 September 2026 asks how Registered Unrecognised Political Parties (RUPPs) should be regulated. It follows a BBC News Hindi investigation which reported that six RUPPs based in Gujarat received about ₹1,700 crore in donations in 2023-24, more than the ₹1,480 crore received in all by five nationally recognised parties. A RUPP is a party registered with the Election Commission (EC) under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA) that has not won enough votes or seats to be recognised as a national or State party. The EC's list had more than 2,800 RUPPs, but only about 750 contested the 2024 Lok Sabha election.
Registration alone brings real privileges. The explainer lists tax exemption on donations under the Income-tax Act, 2025, a common symbol when contesting Lok Sabha or Assembly elections, and up to 20 'star campaigners' whose travel costs are not added to candidates' expenses. In return, RUPPs must keep details of donors who give more than ₹20,000 in a financial year and report them to the EC every year, and donations above ₹2,000 must come by cheque or bank transfer. Compliance is weak. A July 2025 report by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) found that annual reports for 2022-23 were publicly available for only 26% of RUPPs, which makes such parties open to misuse for tax evasion and money laundering.
The core legal gap is that the RPA does not expressly empower the EC to de-register a party. In Indian National Congress v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002), the Supreme Court held that the EC has no general power to de-register a registered party. The EC has instead cleaned its list by delisting inactive parties: it found 334 RUPPs non-compliant in 2025 and had delisted over 800 by October 2025. Reform ideas include the Law Commission's 255th Report, which recommended de-registration of a party that fails to contest elections for ten consecutive years, and the explainer's suggestion of a vote-share threshold for tax benefits, similar to the one for a common symbol.
Prelims facts
- Political parties register with the Election Commission under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951; recognition as a national or State party depends on the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
- In Indian National Congress v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002), the Supreme Court held that the Election Commission has no general power to de-register a registered party.
- The Law Commission's 255th Report recommended de-registering a party that does not contest elections for ten consecutive years.
- A registered unrecognised party can name up to 20 star campaigners; a recognised party can name up to 40.
- An ADR report of July 2025 found 2022-23 annual reports publicly available for only 26% of registered unrecognised parties.
Quick recall
- Under which provision are political parties registered with the Election Commission?
- Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
- Which instrument lays down the criteria for recognising national and State parties?
- The Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
- How many star campaigners can a registered unrecognised party name?
- Up to 20 (recognised parties up to 40).
- Above what amount must a party report a donor's contributions in a financial year?
- More than ₹20,000.
- What is the cap on cash donations to a party from one donor?
- ₹2,000; larger amounts must come by cheque or bank transfer.
- Which 2002 judgment held that the EC cannot generally de-register a party?
- Indian National Congress v. Institute of Social Welfare.
- Which Law Commission report proposed de-registering parties that skip elections for ten consecutive years?
- The 255th Report.
- What share of RUPPs had public 2022-23 annual reports, according to ADR (July 2025)?
- 26%.
Prelims practice question
With reference to Registered Unrecognised Political Parties (RUPPs) in India, which one of the following statements is correct?
- They are registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and can name up to 20 star campaigners.
- They are registered under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 and each gets a reserved symbol.
- The Representation of the People Act, 1951 empowers the Election Commission to de-register any RUPP that does not contest for six years.
- They are not required to report any donations to the Election Commission.
Show answer
Answer: (a) They are registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and can name up to 20 star campaigners.. Registration is under Section 29A of the RPA, and unrecognised parties may name up to 20 star campaigners (recognised parties 40). The Symbols Order governs recognition and symbols; reserved symbols go only to recognised parties. The RPA has no express de-registration power, as the Supreme Court held in 2002. Registered parties must report donations above ₹20,000 to the Election Commission.
Use this in UPSC Mains: previous-year questions
Recurring theme: Electoral reforms, the Election Commission's powers and money power in politics
- How to use this
The RUPP story shows why giving the Election Commission a statutory power to de-register parties remains a needed electoral reform and what it would fix.
- In INC v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002), the Supreme Court held the EC has no general power to de-register a party registered under Section 29A of the RPA, 1951.
- The Law Commission's 255th Report recommended de-registering parties that do not contest for ten consecutive years; the EC instead delisted over 800 inactive RUPPs by October 2025.
- Of more than 2,800 RUPPs, only about 750 contested the 2024 Lok Sabha election, and ADR found 2022-23 annual reports public for only 26% of them.
- How to use this
Large donations routed through obscure registered parties illustrate money power converging with politics and weakening scrutiny by electoral institutions.
- A BBC News Hindi investigation reported six Gujarat-based RUPPs received about ₹1,700 crore in donations in 2023-24, more than the ₹1,480 crore received by five national parties.
- RUPPs enjoy tax exemption on donations, but weak disclosure (only 26% had public 2022-23 reports, per ADR) leaves them open to misuse for tax evasion and money laundering, the explainer notes.
- Reform ideas: link tax exemption to a minimum vote share, mandate audited accounts on a public portal, and coordinate the EC with tax authorities and financial intelligence units.
Recognition thresholds decide which parties count as national or State parties; RUPPs are the long tail below those thresholds.
Mains practice question
Registered unrecognised political parties enjoy tax and campaign privileges with little accountability. Examine the regulatory gaps and suggest reforms. (250 words)
Model answer
Registered Unrecognised Political Parties (RUPPs) are registered with the Election Commission (EC) under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 but lack national or State recognition. A reported ₹1,700 crore in 2023-24 donations to six Gujarat RUPPs has put their regulation in focus.
Privileges without scrutiny
- Tax exemption on donations, a common symbol and up to 20 star campaigners.
- Of more than 2,800 RUPPs, only about 750 contested the 2024 Lok Sabha election.
Regulatory gaps
- No de-registration power: the Supreme Court held in INC v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002) that the EC cannot generally de-register a party.
- Weak disclosure: ADR (July 2025) found 2022-23 annual reports public for only 26% of RUPPs.
- Thin enforcement: donor reporting above ₹20,000 and the ₹2,000 cash limit are poorly monitored, inviting tax evasion and money laundering.
- Delisting is partial: the EC delisted over 800 inactive RUPPs by October 2025, but delisting is an administrative workaround, not a statutory power.
Reforms
- Amend the RPA to let the EC de-register parties, as the Law Commission's 255th Report proposed for parties not contesting for ten consecutive years.
- Link tax exemption to a minimum vote share, as with the common symbol.
- Mandatory audited accounts on a public portal, with penalties for non-filing.
- Coordination between the EC, income tax authorities and financial intelligence units to trace suspicious flows.
- Safeguards so that de-registration follows notice and reasons, protecting genuine small parties.
Small parties widen democratic choice; clear rules should separate them from letterpad entities that exist only to receive money.
The basics
Why this matters
India has thousands of registered parties, but only a handful win recognition. The rest, Registered Unrecognised Political Parties (RUPPs), get legal privileges while the Election Commission (EC) has little power to police them. Reported donations of about ₹1,700 crore to six Gujarat RUPPs in 2023-24 show why that matters.
Registration is not recognition
Any association of Indian citizens can apply to the EC to be registered as a party under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Its constitution must pledge allegiance to the Constitution of India and to socialism, secularism and democracy. Recognition is a separate, later step. A registered party becomes a national or State party only if it crosses vote and seat thresholds under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968. This is explained in Recognition of national and State parties.
- Registered under Section 29A of the RPA
- May get a common symbol when it contests
- Up to 20 star campaigners
- Tax exemption on donations
- Has met vote and seat thresholds under the Symbols Order, 1968
- Gets a reserved symbol
- Up to 40 star campaigners
- Same tax exemption and disclosure duties
Where the money trail goes cold
Parties must report donors giving more than ₹20,000 a year and cannot take cash above ₹2,000 from a donor. The rules work only if parties file and someone checks. See Transparency in political funding.
Why the EC cannot simply strike parties off
The RPA says how to register a party but not how to cancel registration. In INC v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002), the Supreme Court held that the EC has no general power to de-register. So in 2025 the EC used a softer tool: delisting parties that had gone inactive, over 800 by October 2025.
- 1ApplyAn association applies to the EC under Section 29A with its constitution
- 2RegisterIt becomes a registered unrecognised party with tax and campaign privileges
- 3ContestIt fields candidates; a common symbol may be allotted
- 4Cross thresholdsEnough votes and seats bring State or national recognition and a reserved symbol
The reform menu
The Law Commission's 255th Report proposed de-registering parties that skip elections for ten consecutive years; others suggest tying tax exemption to a minimum vote share. The aim is to shut out shell parties without silencing genuine small ones.
Go deeper
In one line: India lets almost anyone register a political party and gives it tax and campaign privileges, but gives the Election Commission (EC) almost no power to strike off parties that exist only on paper.
Why it matters for UPSC
The topic joins the Representation of the People Act, the EC's powers, political funding and electoral reform, all recurring GS2 themes. It also fits Mains questions on money power and the quality of democracy.
The core idea
A party enters the system through Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Most parties never go further; only those that cross thresholds under the Symbols Order win Recognition of national and State parties. Registration still brings a tax exemption on donations, which is why disclosure rules and Transparency in political funding matter. When a party goes dormant or misuses its status, the EC cannot simply cancel it, because of INC v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002).
Numbers and dates to remember
- Six Gujarat RUPPs: about ₹1,700 crore in donations in 2023-24, against ₹1,480 crore for five national parties.
- More than 2,800 RUPPs on the EC's list; about 750 contested the 2024 Lok Sabha election.
- 334 found non-compliant in 2025; over 800 delisted by October 2025.
- ADR, July 2025: 2022-23 annual reports public for only 26% of RUPPs.
- Star campaigners: 20 for unrecognised parties, 40 for recognised parties.
Where to go next
- Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951: the door through which every party enters.
- Recognition of national and State parties: the thresholds that separate the few from the many.
- INC v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002): why the EC cannot de-register.
- Transparency in political funding: the disclosure rules RUPPs often ignore.
Go deeper: tighten the rules or protect small parties?
The case for tougher regulation. Registration is cheap and its benefits are real. A tax exemption without scrutiny invites parties that exist to launder money rather than contest. Only about 750 of more than 2,800 RUPPs contested the 2024 Lok Sabha election, and ADR found three in four had not made their 2022-23 annual reports public. The Law Commission's 255th Report proposed that a party failing to contest for ten consecutive years be de-registered, a power the EC has sought because of INC v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002).
The case for caution. Small parties are how new movements enter politics. A broad power to de-register could be used against inconvenient parties, so any new power needs notice, reasons and appeal. Many experts therefore prefer targeting the benefit, for example linking tax exemption to a minimum vote share, as the Symbols Order does for the common symbol under Recognition of national and State parties.
The funding angle. The Supreme Court struck down electoral bonds in 2024 in ADR v. Union of India, holding that voters have a right to information about political funding under Article 19(1)(a). That logic extends to RUPPs: disclosure under Transparency in political funding is meaningless if filings are missing and unchecked.
A middle path. Statutory de-registration for long inactivity, automatic loss of tax benefits for non-filing, and data sharing between the EC and tax authorities would target shell parties while leaving genuine small parties free to compete under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
The legal door through which every party enters
In one line: Section 29A is the provision under which an association of Indian citizens applies to the Election Commission to be registered as a political party.
What it requires
The association must apply to the EC with a copy of its memorandum or constitution. That document must state that the party will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India and to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy, and will uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. The provision was added to the RPA in 1989.
Why it is in the news
Section 29A covers only registration. It says nothing about cancelling registration, which is why the EC has had to rely on delisting inactive parties rather than de-registering them. Reform proposals, including the Law Commission's 255th Report, would amend the Act to add such a power.
Where to go next
Recognition of national and State parties
The thresholds that separate recognised parties from the rest
In one line: Recognition is the status the EC gives a registered party once it wins enough votes or seats, under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
The thresholds
A party can become a State party by, for example, winning at least 6% of valid votes in a State Assembly election plus two seats, or 6% in a Lok Sabha election from the State plus one seat, or 3% of Assembly seats or three seats, whichever is more, or by securing 8% of valid votes. It can become a national party by winning 6% of valid votes in four or more States plus four Lok Sabha seats, or 2% of Lok Sabha seats from at least three States, or by being recognised as a State party in four States.
Why it matters
Recognised parties get a reserved symbol and up to 40 star campaigners. India had six national parties as of 2024. Everyone else is a registered unrecognised party.
Where to go next
INC v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002)
The judgment that explains why the EC cannot de-register parties
In one line: In this 2002 case the Supreme Court held that the Election Commission has no general power under the Representation of the People Act to de-register a political party.
What the Court said
The Court treated registration under Section 29A as a quasi-judicial act. Once a party is registered, the Act gives the EC no express power to review or cancel that decision. The Court allowed only narrow exceptions, such as where registration was obtained by fraud.
Why it is in the news
The judgment is the reason thousands of dormant parties stayed on the rolls for years. Since the EC cannot de-register, it has used delisting of inactive parties instead, delisting over 800 by October 2025. The EC and the Law Commission have both asked Parliament to fill the gap.
Where to go next
Transparency in political funding
The disclosure rules RUPPs often fail to follow
In one line: Indian law exempts party donations from tax but asks parties to disclose large donors, a bargain that works only if filings are made and checked.
The rules
Parties must report to the EC every donor who gives more than ₹20,000 in a financial year. Cash donations above ₹2,000 are not allowed; larger sums must come by cheque or bank transfer. Parties must also file annual audit reports.
The judgment that raised the bar
In February 2024, in ADR v. Union of India, the Supreme Court struck down the electoral bond scheme, holding that anonymous funding violated voters' right to information under Article 19(1)(a).
Why RUPPs are a weak spot
ADR found that annual reports for 2022-23 were public for only 26% of RUPPs. Without filings, the ₹20,000 disclosure rule cannot be tested, and the tax exemption becomes a loophole.
Where to go next
Take the 11 September 2026 quiz: 54 Prelims-style questions with answers