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

1974 Supreme(SC) 330

K.K.MATHEW, N.L.UNTWALIA, P.JAGANMOHAN REDDY, P.K.GOSWAMI, P.N.BHAGWATI
Charan Lal Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Fakruddin Ali Ahmed – Respondent


Judgment

ORDER:- Our brother Beg J., sitting Chambers has referred this Election Petition for preliminary hearing as to whether the petitioner has locus standi and whether he can proceed further with the petition. The question before us, therefore, is whether the petitioner is a "candidate" as defined in Section 13 (a) for the petition would be maintainable by him only if he is "Candidate" as defined in Section 13 (a). The Petitioner claims to have been duly nominated as a candidate and we have therefore to determine whether his claim is well-founded. His nomination was rejected on the ground of non-compliance with Sections 5B and 5C introduced in the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act 1952 by an amendment made by Act 5 of 1974. These sections read as follows:

"5B (1) On or before the date appointed under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 4, each candidate shall, either in person or by any of his proposers or seconders, between the hours of eleven o clock in the forenoon and three o clock in the afternoon deliver to the Returning Officer at the place specified in this behalf in the public notice issued under Section 5 a nomination paper completed in the prescribe














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