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

1965 Supreme(Bom) 11

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
( P. B. Gajendragadkar C. J., K. N. Wanchoo, M. Hidayatullah, J. C. Shah and S. M. Sikri JJ. )
BHAIYA LAL - Appellant
V.
HARIKISHAN SINGH and others -Respondents
Advocates Appeared
For appellant – N. C. Chatterjee, V. S. Sawhney, S. S. Khanduja and Ganpat Rai.
For respondent No. 1 - G. S. Pathak and Dipak Datta Choudhri.

The President can specify the lists of Scheduled Castes by reference to different districts or sub-areas of the States under Article 341 (1) of the Constitution.

Headnote:

ELECTION LAW - VALIDITY OF ELECTION - RESERVED SEAT - CHAMAR CASTE - DOHAR CASTE - PRESIDENTIAL ORDER - INTERPRETATION - ARTICLE 341 (1) OF THE CONSTITUTION.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, Bhaiyalal, was declared duly elected in a reserved seat for the Chamar scheduled caste in the Berasia Constituency in Madhya Pradesh. Respondent No. 1, Harikishan Singh, challenged the validity of the election on the ground that the appellant belonged to the Dohar caste and was not a Chamar.

Finding of the Court:

The Election Tribunal and the High Court found that the appellant did not belong to the Chamar caste and was not qualified to contest the reserved seat for the scheduled caste of Chamars in the Constituency in question.

Issues: 1. Whether the appellant belonged to the Chamar caste and was qualified to contest the reserved seat for the scheduled caste of Chamars in the Constituency in question. 2. Whether the President could specify the lists of Scheduled Castes by reference to different districts or sub-areas of the States.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Presidential Order issued under Article 341 (1) of the Constitution specifies the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races, or tribes which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to a particular State or Union territory. 2. The President can specify castes, races or tribes or parts thereof in relation not only to the entire State, but in relation to parts of the State where he is satisfied that the examination of the social and educational backwardness of the race, caste or tribe justifies such specification.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed with costs.

JUDGMENT

GAJENDRAGADKAR C. J. -This appeal by special leave arises out of an Election petition filed by respondent No. 1, Harikishan Singh, challenging the validity of the election of the appellant, Bhaiyalal, in a reserved seat in the Berasia Constituency in the district of Sehore in Madhya Pradesh. The election in question was held in February, 1962; at this election the appellant, respondent No. I, and three others offered themselves as candidates. The appellant was declared duly elected on the 26th February, 1962 Elince he had polled the highest number of votes. His next rival was respondent No. 1. By his petition, respondent No.1 challenged the validity of the appellants election on the ground that the appellant belonged to the Dohar caste and was not a Chamar. The appellant had filed his nomination paper on the 19th January, 1962 before the Returning Officer at Sehore and had declared that he was a member of the Chamar scheduled caste of the State of Madhya Pradesh in relation to Sehore district. This declaration was accepted by the Returning Officer. Respondent No.1 contended that Dohar caste was not recognised as the scheduled caste for the districts of Sehora and Raisen, and so, the Returning Officer had improperly and illegally accepted the declaration of the appellant as one belonging to the Chamar scheduled caste. Since the appellant did not belong to the scheduled caste in question, he was not entitled to stand for election for the reserved seat

in respect of the said Constituency. This is the basis on which the validity of the appellants election was challenged by respondent No. 1. On the other hand, the appellant urged that the election petition filed by respondent No. 1 was not maintainable inasmuch as he had not deposited the security of Rs.2,000 in the manner prescribed by the statutory rules.

2. On these pleadings, the Election Tribunal framed appropriate issues. The first four issues covered the principal contention raised by respondent No.1 against the validity of the appellants nomination as a member belonging to the Chamar scheduled caste, whereas the fifth issue related to the appellants contention about the incompetence of the election petition filed by respondent No. 1. Both parties led evidence in support of their pleas on the principal point of dispute between them. The Election Tribunal cou3idered the oral evidence adduced by the parties, examined the documents on which they respectively relied, and found in favour of respondent No. 1. In regard to the plea raised by the appellant against the competence of the election petition, the Tribunal found against him. In the result, the election petition was allowed and the appellants election declared invalid.

3. Against this decision of the Election Tribunal, the appellant preferred an appeal to the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Before the High Court, the s:\me two points were urged. The High Court has confirmed the finding of the Election Tribunal on both the points. It has held that the election petition filed by respondent No.1 was valid and the security deposit was made by him in accordance with the statutory requirements. On the merits of the controversy as to whether the appellant was a Chamar by caste and as such was entitled to be elected for the reserved seat in the Constituency in question, the High Court, in substance, has agreed with the conclusion of the Election Tribunal. In consequence, the appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed on the 23rd April, 19ti3. It is against this decision that the appellant has come to this Court by special leave.

4. On behalf of the appellant Mr. Chatterjee has contended that the High Court was in error in confirming the finding of the Election Tribunal in regard to the caste to which the appellant belonged. It appears that the appellant’s case was that he was a Dohar Chamar which according to him is a sub -caste of the Chamar scheduled caste. He urged that the said sub -caste was also called Mochi. In







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
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 Back to top