Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.C. LAHOTI, CJI., G.P. MATHUR, J.
TAPASH MAJUMDER AND ANOTHER - PETITIONERS
VERSUS
PRANAB DASGUPTA AND OTHERS - RESPONDENTS
SLP (C) NO. 14413 OF 2004,
DECIDED ON AUGUST 6, 2004
Constitution of India, 1950, Article 136 - General Elections of East Bengal Club- Voters list sought to be corrected by way of a suit and appointment of special officer for holding and conducting the elections- Single Judge refused to stay holding of election- As the date of election was near Supreme Court refused stay the election- However, the petitioners given liberty liberty of filing their objections before the learned Single Judge- Such objections to be heard and decided summarily without regard to the nature and scope of the suit before the learned Single Judge-If the learned Single Judge feels that proper elections have not been held and a case for holding elections afresh is made out, then the learned Single Judge would be at liberty to direct elections being held afresh. [Paras 4 and 5]
ORDER
1. HEARD ON THE QUESTION OF ADMISSION.
2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT 6 HAS MADE APPEARANCE, SUBMITTING THAT HE IS INSTRUCTED BY THE OFFICE-BEARERS OF THE CLUB. WE FIND THAT RESPONDENTS 1 TO 30 ARE ALL OFFICE-BEARERS OF THE CLUB AND, THEREFORE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF HEARING ON THIS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION, WE ASSUME THAT THE RESPONDENTS ARE REPRESENTED.
3. THE DISPUTE RELATES TO GENERAL ELECTIONS OF THE EAST BENGAL CLUB. THE PETITIONERS HAVE FILED A SUIT SEEKING CORRECTIONS IN THE VOTERS LIST AND APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL OFFICER FOR HOLDING AND CONDUCTING THE ELECTIONS. BY FROM THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 12-7-2004 IN APOT NO. 352 OF 2004 OF THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA ORDER DATED 5-7-2004, THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE HAS REFUSED TO STAY THE HOLDING OF THE ELECTIONS AND INSTEAD DIRECTED THAT THE ELECTIONS MAY BE HELD AND THE RESULT OF THE ELECTIONS SHALL ABIDE BY THE RESULT OF THE APPLICATION PENDING BEFORE HIM. THE PETITIONERS WENT IN APPEAL WHICH HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY A DIVISION BENCH OF THE HIGH COURT. FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE PETITIONERS HAVE FILED THIS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION.
4. IT IS CONCEDED AT THE BAR THAT THE ELECTIONS ARE FIXED FOR SUNDAY, 8-8-2004. WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO STAY THE ELECTIONS. HOWEVER, WE ALLOW THE PETITIONERS THE LIBERTY OF FILING THEIR OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE. SUCH OBJECTIONS FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE SHALL BE HEARD AND DECIDED SUMMARILY WITHOUT REGARD TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE SUIT BEFORE THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE. IF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE FEELS THAT PROPER ELECTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN HELD AND A CASE FOR HOLDING ELECTIONS AFRESH IS MADE OUT, THEN THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO DIRECT ELECTIONS BEING HELD AFRESH AND PASS APPROPRIATE INCIDENTAL AND CONSEQUENTIAL ORDERS.
5. SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION BE TREATED AS DISPOSED OF.
COURT MASTERS
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
