SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(AP) 59

M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
M. A. Faheem Uddin – Appellant
Versus
Shaik Nayeem – Respondent


Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:A. Sudarshan Reddy, M. Rajendender Reddy, Advocates.
For the Respondent:P. Veera Reddy, Shafath Ahmed Khan, Advocates.

Judgment :

This Revision petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging the order, dated 15-10-2015, passed in I.A.No.634 of 2015 in OP.No.235 of 2014 by the Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge and Election Tribunal, Nizamabad.

The Revision petitioner was the petitioner before the Tribunal and the 1st respondent was the election petitioner/respondent and they will be hereinafter referred to as revision petitioner and 1st respondent for convenience of reference.

The revision petitioner (the 1st respondent in Election petition) filed petition under Sections 71, 72 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act (for short the “Act”) and rule 100 (3) of A.P.Municipal Corporations (Conduct of Election of Members) Rules, 2005 (“for short “Election Rules, 2005”) alleging that he contested for the office of Corporator from Division/ward No.29, Nizamabad Municipal Corporation held on 30-03-2014. The revision petitioner was declared as elected for the Division/ward on 12-05-2014 having secured highest number of votes among nine contested rival candidat










































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top