Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND A. VARADARAJAN, JJ.
Brij Mohan, Appellant
Versus
Sat Pal, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 2650 (NCE) of 1984, D/- 13-3-1985
Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Section 33(4), 100(1)(d)(iv), 33(1), 33(5), 36 - Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 – Section 5, 4, 14 - Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 - Rule 4, 2(f) – Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 84, 102, 173, 191 - Election - Nomination Paper Rejected - Election petition was filed by, respondent, an elector in Jind constituency - His case in election petition was that Dog Ram was registered as an elector of electoral roll of Jind constituency - Ram Partap who proposed Dog Ram as a candidate, was registered as elector of same constituency - Name of Dog Ram and his postal address were correctly given in nomination paper - But part of electoral roll was mentioned as 57 instead of 39 by an inadvertent mistake committed by person who filed nomination paper - Similarly, in case of proposer, serial number of elector and number of constituency were given correctly but number of It is house was wrongly entered in column meant for part of electoral roll - Whether nomination paper of Shri Dog Ram contesting candidate has been improperly rejected - Whether candidate and proposer are registered as electors and qualified to be nominated as a candidate and to propose candidate as a candidate for filling a seat in Legislative Assembly - Whether candidate Dog Ram and his proposer P. W. 2 were electors in constituency he asked candidate-Dog Ram to point out names of himself and his proposer in electoral roll – Held, Appellant had with him a certified copy of electoral roll of Sandesh constituency where his name was enrolled and he showed it to Returning Officer - Mistake complained of occurred because both appellant as well as Returning Officer looked into main voters list of Arrah constituency but overlooked deletion noted in a separate list - In these circumstances, it has been held by this Court that High Court was not justified in allowing election petition on ground that nomination paper of appellant was improperly accepted - This decision will not apply to facts of present case where with serial numbers and numbers given as part numbers of candidate and proposer in nomination paper their names could not be traced in concerned parts as registered voters - Returning Officer, therefore, felt helpless and asked candidate to point out names of himself and his proposer in electoral roll which he did not do - Present case as defect in nomination paper in that case was only difference in age in electoral roll and nomination paper - It has been held by this Court that it was a case of inaccurate description mentioned in S. 33(4) of Act which ought, to have been got corrected or over-looked by Returning Officer having regard to language of proviso to that sub-section – Court is of opinion that Returning Officer in present case could not be said to have improperly rejected nomination paper of Dog Ram - Appeal allowed.
Judgment
A. VARADARAJAN, J.:- This appeal by the respondent in Election Petn. No. 7 of 1982 on the file of the Punjab and Haryana High Court is directed against the judgment of a learned single Judge declaring the appellants election from the Jind constituency of the Haryana Legislative Assembly as void on the ground that the nomination paper of a candidate Dog Ram was improperly rejected. The last date for filing nomination papers was 24-4-1982, and in the scrutiny made on 26-4-1982 nomination papers of two candidates including Dog Ram were rejected by the Returning Officer. The principal contest was between one Mange Ram, a Congress (1) candidate and the appellant, an independent candidate who had been set up by the Lok Dal party. The polling was on 19-5-1982 and after the counting was made on 20-5-1982 the appellant was declared elected from the Jind constituency.
2. The election petition was filed by, the respondent, Sat Pal, an elector in the Jind constituency. His case in the election petition was that Dog Ram was registered as an elector at Serial No. 177 and house No. 57 in part 39 of the electoral roll of the Jind constituency. Ram Partap who proposed Dog Ram as a candidate, was registered as elector at Serial No. 313 and house No. 6 in part 39 of the same constituency. The name of Dog Ram and his postal address were correctly given in the nomination paper. But the part of the electoral roll was mentioned as 57 instead of 39 by an inadvertent mistake committed by the person who filed the nomination paper. Similarly, in the case of the proposer Ram Partap, the serial number of the elector and the number of the constituency were given correctly but the number of It is house was wrongly entered in the column meant for the part of the electoral roll. These inaccuracies in the nomination paper were technical in nature and should have been rectified by the Returning Officer at the time of scrutiny. No other candidate or proposer objected to the acceptance of the nomination paper of Dog Ram but the Returning Officer on his own rejected the nomination paper by the following order :
"Particulars of the candidate and the proposer have been wrongly entered in the nomination paper. The candidate who is present in person failed to show me the voters list where his and the proposers names are entered. Hence rejected."
3. The appellant contested the election petition contending that the Returning Officer compared the admittedly inaccurate particulars given in the nomination paper with those entered in the part of the voters list mentioned in the nomination paper and found them to be incorrect and asked Dog Ram to, show the names of himself and his proposer Ram Partap in the electoral rolls and that as the candidate was unable to do so he rejected the nomination paper and was right in doing so.
4. In the first part of the nomination paper, annexure R-6, Ram Partap, P. W. 2 has stated thus under his signature :
"I nominate as a candidate for election to the Legislative Assembly from the 48 Jind constituent assembly :
Candidates name : Dog Ram s/o Mohan Lal
Postal Address : Village Amar Heri, Post Office Ahirka (Jind)
His name, is entered at SI. No. 177 in Part No. 57 of the electoral roll for the 48 Jind Assembly Constituency.
My name is Ram Partap and it is entered at Sl. No. 313 in part No. 6 of the electoral roll for the 48 Jind Assembly Constituency."
5. In Part No. 39 of the voters list relating, to Amar Heri village, Dog Ram is entered at Sl. No. 177 and House No. 57 and Ram Partap, P. W. 2 is entered at Sl. No. 313 and house number 6. Thus it is seen that in the nomination paper, Serial Nos. of Dog Ram and Ram Partap, P. W. 2 have been correctly given as 177 and 313 respectively, but the part numbers have been given wrongly as 57 and 6 respectively which are their respective house numbers instead of the correct part No. 39.
6. The learned single Judge who tried the election petition framed the issue as to whether the nomination paper of
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
