SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 413

S. H. KAPADIA
Jaipal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sumitra Mahajan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Kapadia, J.-Whether the election petition filed by the appellant was lacking in material facts as required under section 83(1)(a) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act") is the question which arises for determination in this appeal referred under section 116-A of the said Act.

2. The appellant was a member of Indian Administrative Service having 40 years service to his credit and who was 59½ years old. By letter dated 13.3.2002, he sought voluntary retirement under rule 16(2) of All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1958 Rules") with immediate effect. Appellant was registered as an elector at 535, Halqa No. 62, Mujeggar Plot No. 9A, Section-6, Faridabad in the State of Haryana and eligible to contest election to Rajya Sabha, in which two vacancies had occurred which were to be filled from the State of Haryana. A notification was issued to fill up the two vacancies under which the last date of filing the nomination papers was 14.3.2002, the date of scrutiny was 15.3.2002, last date of withdrawal was 18.3.2002 and the date of polling was 27.3.2003. The appellant sought




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top