An election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short “the Act”) to declare the inaction of respondents 1 to 7 to check the malpractices of the 8th respondent during 2009 assembly elections and disqualify the 8th respondent as Member of Legislative Assembly, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and declare his election from Giddalur Assembly Constituency No.231 as illegal and void.

2. The 9th respondent was impleaded on his application in E.P.M.P. No.922 of 2009 on 22-01-2010.

3. On Application No.213 of 2010 being allowed on16-07-2010, respondents 1 to 7 were deleted from the array of respondents.

4. E.P.M.P. No.1047 of 2009 under Sections 83 and 86 of the Act read with Order VI Rule 16 and Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was allowed on merits on contest on 03-09-2010, due to which the pleadings in paras 3(b), (c), (d) and (f) to (i) of the election petition were struck off.

5. The election petition and the affidavit of the election petitioner in support thereof stated in the remaining contents that the 8th respondent is a registered contractor of public works attending to Government works and kept such public works pending at Dupadu, Kandukuru, Alampur, Giddalur and K.S. Palli, in spite of which he was permitted to file his nomination. On that date, the 8th respondent was a partner of his firm taking up the public works on contract basis and the subsisting contracts on the date of filing nomination disqualified the 8th respondent under Section 9A of the Act and his election is liable to be set aside. The petitioner also claimed to have made a representation to respondents 3 and 6 to permit three autos with electric mikes for canvassing and the permission was withheld in spite of paying the fee, whereas ten vehicles were allowed for the 8th respondent, which was illegal, discriminatory, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the election petition.

6. The written statement of the 8th respondent in so far as the above allegations are concerned, claimed that it is true that the respondent was a registered contractor, who entered into contracts in his individual capacity for executing certain works of the Government, but he has no subsisting contracts on the date of scrutiny of nominations on 06-04-2009. The 8th respondent was never a partner of any firm taking up public works and his registration as a special contractor was from 2005 to March, 2009. On 21-03-2009 he gave a declaration transferring all the pending works, including his experience as a special class contractor, in favour of A.V. Ram Babu Infra Private Limited, a private limited company registered on 22-07-2008 under the Indian Companies Act. The company also gave a declaration on the same day taking over all the assets, liabilities, pending works, obligations and experience of the 8th respondent as an individual. Both the individual and the company submitted an application on 21-03-2009 along with a draft, dated 19-03-2009 for Rs.10,000/-on ING Vysya Bank Limited, Markapur to the Engineer-in-Chief to transfer all the subsisting works, assets, liabilities and obligations, etc., from the individual to the company. The application was referred to the committee of engineers who passed a resolution on consideration as per the proceedings, dated 25-03-2009 agreeing to so transfer, which was intimated by the Engineer-in-Chief in his proceedings, dated 30-03-2009. The committee of Engineers-in-Chief and the Commissioner of Tenders passed a resolution in their 68th meeting held on 25-03-2009 and approved and recognized that all the existing works, experience, assets, liabilities and obligations of the individual stood transferred to the company and all the Directors of the company shall be responsible for discharging all the liabilities due to the department that arise in future from the works done by the 8th respondent. The resolution was communicated by th