The fixation of a time for nominations is a matter of substance and not a mere matter of procedure and that the election officer has no power to receive nomination papers after the time fixed.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ calling for the records in original Petition, No. 2 of 1953 on the file of the Election Commissioner (District Munsif) Gurazala, relating to the election of the Panchayat Board, Kandlakunta, and to quash the order, dated 28th August, 1953, therein.

( 2 ) THE election of the President and members of (he Panchayat Board of Kandlakunta village was held on 29th January, 1953. It is not now in dispute that for the presidentship of the Panchayat Board there were two candidates who filed nomination papers before 9 A. M. They are Markondiah and Panakala Reddi. Markondaiah filed a written objection that the father s name of Panakala Reddi was not correctly noted in the voters list and hence his nomination paper could not be accepted. After scrutiny and verification, the Election Officer upheld the objection of Markondaiah and rejected the nomination of Panakala Reddi. At this stage it may be mentioned that the 1st respondent s case is that after so rejecting the nomination of Panakala Reddi, the Election Officer called for fresh nominations, which he was not entitled to do, and thereupon the petitioner s name was proposed and accepted after 10 A. M. ; that the 1st respondent thereupon filed written objections that the time for receiving nomination papers was over and that therefore he could not accept any more nominations. It is the further case of the 1st respondent that the election officer accepted the nomination of the petitioner notwithstanding his objection.

( 3 ) THE poll was taken and as per the result of the poll the 1st respondent got 367 votes while the petitioner got 391 votes. The petitioner was thereupon declared elected.

( 4 ) THE 1st respondent filed original Petition No. 2 of 1953 on the file of the Election commissioner, Gurazala, in which he contended inter alia that the acceptance of the nomination of the petitioner is contrary to the procedure prescribed under the rules and that the nomination of the petitioner having been accepted illegally and contrary to the rules, it is void and must be set aside and he be declared to have been duly elected. There were several other grounds which were urged by the 1st respondent in the election petition. The petitioner in this writ petition filed a counter-affidavit, adduced evidence and contested the election petition. The Election Commissioner raised the following issues for consideration : (1) Whether the election is liable to be set aside for all or any of the grounds mentioned in the petition ? (2) Whether the alleged vitiating circumstances are true? (3) Whether the petitioner is entitled to be declared President? (4) To what relief is petitioner entitled?

( 5 ) ON a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced before him, the Election Commissioner found that the Election Officer received the petitioner s nomination some time later than 10 A. M. ; that the hour appointed for receiving the nominations was 8 to 9 A. M. , and that there was an irregularity in respect of the reception of the nomination papers ; that after the announcement by the election officer at 9 A. M. that the nomination of Panakala Reddi was not accepted, many of the supporters of the 1st respondent left the place to attend to urgent harvesting operations under the impression that the 1st respondent would be returned unopposed ; that if the supporters of the 1st respondent had not left the spot, the result would certainly have been different ; that the vitiating circumstances in respect of the illegal reception of the petitioner s nomination are true ; that therefore the election of the petitioner is void and that his election was liable to be set aside on that ground. The Election Commissioner held that whether as an uncontested candidate or in an election in which all the voters participated, the 1st respondent would have been declared elected as President, a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document