The Andhra Pradesh State Election Commissioner (SEC) on Wednesday launched the 'eWatch', a digital application (app) to monitor the rural local bodies' elections.
The app has been developed to ensure free and fair elections. However, hours after the launch the app was challenged in the High Court.
Advocate Sudhakar moved the High Court on Wednesday seeking a stay on the launch. According to Times of India, he alleged that the app was developed by a private company and was not verified by authorities for a safety audit.
The advocate also pointed out that the state government had earlier launched a similar app for elections and there was no need for two apps to lodge complaints during the elections.
The advocate urged the HC to give orders to SEC to use existing C Vigil, Nigha apps, which have been developed by the Union government and the state government.
During the launch of the app, State Election Commission (SEC) Secretary Kanna Babu, however, said that the app and its dashboard development have been completely done in-house.
SEC Secretary Kanna Babu said the 'eWatch' or 'election watch' is available both on the web as well as a mobile app, adding that once a complaint is lodged, nobody can tinker with it. According to the secretary, each complaint has its own timeline, requiring its closure officially.
"Which complaint has been pending for how much time and how it has been resolved, including at what level will also be available in the app," he said.
Meanwhile, YSRCP has also strongly opposed the app by the SEC alleging that it will favour TDP. YSRCP leader Lella Appireddy alleged that there is no difference between TDP and SEC.
He sought an explanation from SEC Nimmagadda about the need for a new app when there are already apps developed by the government.
The SEC Chief Nimmagadd Ramesh and the state government have a long standing bitter feud over the conducting of local body elections.
Earlier the High Court allowed the SEC to conduct elections. Following this the YSRCP government moved to the Supreme Court seeking a stay.
However, the top court refused to give stay on the High Court’s orders.