Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.D. TULZAPURKAR AND V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI, JJ.
Mahendra Kumar Shastri, Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and another, Respondents.
Write Petn. No. 1675 of 1979, D/- 10-1-1983.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Ranjan Dwivedi, Advocate, for petitioner; Mr. M. M. Abdul Khadar, Sr. Advocate, M/s. E. M. S. Anam and R. N. Poddar, Advocates with him, for Respondents.
provisions of sub-section (5) are reasonable and in public interest
Representation of the People Act - Section 62(5) – Election – Disability – Court do not find any merit in the contentions urged by the petitioner in the writ petition - Disability which is imposed under Section 62(5) of Representation of People Act is equally applicable to all persons - Held, Election or offering themselves as candidates for such election - Provision is reasonable and in public interest to maintain purity in electing peoples representatives and there is no arbitrariness or discrimination involved - Writ petition is dismissed.
ORDER :- We do not find any merit in the contentions urged by the petitioner in the writ petition. The disability which is imposed under Section 62(5) of the Representation of the People Act is equally applicable to all persons similarly situate mentioned therein and they are even prevented from contesting the election or offering themselves as candidates for such election. The provision is reasonable and in public interest to maintain purity in electing peoples representatives and there is no arbitrariness or discrimination involved. Rule is discharged and the writ petition is dismissed.
Rule discharged.
For Citation : AIR 1983 SC 299 = 1984(2) SCC 442 = 1983(1) Scale 27 = 1983 UJ 208
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
