Lucknow: Teachers may be accustomed to evaluating students and marking answer sheets, but when it came to casting their votes in the 2026 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council elections, a significant number of their ballots failed the validity test. As many as 9.05% of votes polled in one teachers’ constituency were declared invalid, while all six teachers’ constituencies witnessed an increase in rejected ballots compared to the 2020 elections.According to figures compiled by the office of the UP chief electoral officer, 14,185 votes out of 1,91,894 polled across six teachers’ constituencies were declared invalid, translating into a rejection rate of 7.39%. In comparison, 6,498 votes out of 1,37,628 polled in the corresponding constituencies were rejected in 2020, accounting for 4.72%.The figures reveal an unusual electoral paradox. Teachers, who are professionally engaged in imparting education and assessing students, recorded thousands of invalid ballots in an election where voters were required to follow a specific preferential voting procedure.Bareilly-Moradabad Teachers’ constituency recorded the highest rejection rate, with 3,183 of the 35,161 votes polled declared invalid, accounting for 9.05%. This was almost double the 4.81% rejection rate recorded in 2020.Meerut Teachers’ constituency followed closely, with 2,809 invalid votes out of 31,214 polled, representing 9%, against 5.82% six years ago.Agra recorded 2,128 invalid votes out of 29,865 polled, taking its rejection rate to 7.13%, compared to 4.06% in 2020. The constituency registered an increase of 3.07 percentage points.Lucknow Teachers’ constituency witnessed 1,824 invalid votes out of 27,659 polled, accounting for 6.59%, compared to 5.05% in the previous election.Similarly, Gorakhpur-Faizabad recorded 2,800 invalid votes out of 43,611 polled, representing 6.42%, against 4.43% in 2020.Varanasi recorded the lowest rejection rate among teachers’ constituencies at 5.91%, with 1,441 of 24,384 votes declared invalid. However, the figure was still higher than the 4.42% recorded six years ago.Interestingly, the situation was no different among graduate voters. Lucknow Graduates’ constituency recorded 11,223 invalid votes out of 1,23,444 polled, accounting for 9.09%, the highest rejection rate among all 11 constituencies that went to polls.Allahabad-Jhansi Graduates’ constituency recorded 9,596 invalid votes, representing 8.76%, while Meerut registered 3,976 rejected ballots, accounting for 8.75%. Varanasi recorded 9,472 invalid votes, or 7.96%, while Agra reported 5,852 invalid votes, representing 6.17%.Across the five graduates’ constituencies, 40,119 of the 4,92,200 votes polled were declared invalid, accounting for approximately 8.15%.Together, the teachers’ and graduates’ constituencies recorded 54,304 invalid votes out of 6,84,094 polled, representing nearly 7.94% of all votes cast.The high rejection rate also draws attention to the voting procedure prescribed for Legislative Council elections, which differs substantially from the electronic voting system used in Lok Sabha and assembly elections.Under Rule 37A, read with Rule 70 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, elections to graduates’ and teachers’ constituencies follow the system of proportional representation through the single transferable vote.Instead of pressing a button against a candidate’s name, voters must indicate their preferences on a ballot paper by writing the figure ‘1’ against their first-choice candidate. They may subsequently mark ‘2’, ‘3’, ‘4’ and so on against other candidates in order of preference.Marking the first preference is mandatory, while indicating additional preferences is optional. The figures can be written in international numerals, Roman numerals or numerals used in Indian languages, but not in words.Ballots can be rejected if the first preference is missing, marked against more than one candidate, or indicated in words instead of figures. Using an unauthorised pen or making identifying marks can also invalidate a ballot.The prescribed procedure means that even a seemingly minor error in recording the first preference can render an otherwise properly cast vote invalid.However, the constituency-wise figures do not specify the precise reasons behind the rejected ballots. It therefore remains unclear how many votes were invalidated because of incorrect preference marking, use of an unauthorised writing instrument or other procedural violations.
