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

2023 Supreme(Pat) 922

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HARISH KUMAR, J.
CWJC No.1717 of 2023
(24.11.2023)
Md. Tazuddin ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Kalyan Shankar.
For the Respondents: M/s Ajay, GA-5, Prateek Kumar Sinha, AC to GA-5.
For the B.S.E.C. : Mr. Girish Pandey.
For the Resp No.5 : Mr. Shankar Kumar Thakur.
For the Resp No.6 : M/s S. N. Yadav, Saroj Kumar.

Headnote:

Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006–Section 137 & Constitution of India–Article 227–Code of Civil Procedure, 1908–Order IX Rule 13–Order/judgement in election petition–Writ petition–maintainibility–Order/judgement of the Election Tribunal can be assailed before the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India–any order/judgement passed by a Court or Tribunal even if it is ex-parte is amenable to Writ judisdiction u/s Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India–such power cannot be scuttled nor any embargo be fixed thereupon on the plea of remedy provided under Order IX Rule 13 CPC. (Paras 33 & 38)

Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006–Section 139–Declaring election to be void–election petition on the ground that candidature of respondent no. 6 has materially affected the result of respondent no. 5, because the respondent no. 6 secured 2387 Votes and difference between the petitioner (winning candidate) and respondent no. 5 was only 1376 votes–it is trite that any election cannot be set aside as void, merely on assumption and presumption, rather its void character should be clear as a crystal and be supporting as a returned candidate–there is no evidence of corrupt practice at the hands of the returned candidate nor there is any issue of valid votes in favour of respondent no. 5 (election petitioner) no improper reception of votes in favour of returned candidate–the learned Tribunal has erred in law in coming to conclusion based on hypothetical assumption and presumption and on this score alone the same is fit to be set aside–Writ petition stands allowed.

2016 (4) PLJR 258, 2017 (3) PLJR 707, 2010 (4) PLJR 640, 2017 SCC Online Pat 449, CWJC No. 4400/2019 D/- 8.1.2020, (2018) 2 SCC 649, (2015) 5 SCC 423, (2020) 20 SCC 302, 2016 (1) PLJR 109, 2013 (2) PLJR 953, AIR 1954 SC 210–Referred.

Harish Kumar, J. – Heard the parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 12.10.2022 passed by the Court of learned Sub- Judge-I, Civil Court, Benipatti, in Election Suit No. 02 of 2022, by which the learned court has allowed the Election Petition filed by Respondent No.5 herein and set aside the Election of the petitioner dated 12.12.2021 for the post of Member of Madhubani Zila Parishad Territorial Constituency No.12 and further directed the State Election Commission to conduct the Election afresh within six months from today. It has further been directed to assess the cost of fresh election and realize the same from the officials, who are responsible for the improper acceptance of nomination of opposite party no.4 (respondent no.6 herein) and to lodge an F.I.R. against the respondent no.6 for procuring forged caste certificate leading to his improper acceptance of nomination and also enquire the role of the then Circle Officer, Bisfi, Madhunbani and opposite party no.5 (petitioner herein) in the issuance of forged certificate.

3. The short facts as enumerated from the record is/are that in the year 2021 the State Election Commission has notified election for the post of member of Madhubani Zila Parishad. The date of nomination was fixed from 18.11.2021 to 24.11.2021. The scrutiny of nomination paper was on 27.11.2021 and the candidates were allowed to take back the nomination paper by 29.11.2021. The allotment of symbol to the respective candidates was made on 29.11.2021. The date of election was fixed on 12.12.2021 and the date of counting was fixed on 14.12.2021.

4. The Madhubani Zila Parishad Territorial Constituency no.12 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Constituency No.12’)was reserved for Extremely Backward Classes and the candidates filing their nomination paper for the election must belong to Extremely Backward Classes. The petitioner having the requisite qualification and being member of Extremely Backward Class filed his nomination paper for contesting the election in the Constituency no.12. Apart from other candidates, the respondent no.6 also filed nomination paper on 20.11.2021 enclosing caste certificate bearing no. BCCCO/2021/2440584 dated 15.04.2021 issued by the Circle Officer, Bisfi, Madhubani showing his caste as “CHAI” falling under the E.B.C. category. The election petitioner (respondent no.5 herein), who filed Election Case No. 02 of 2022, also filed his nomination as member of Extremely Backward category.

5. The election was held on the scheduled date and counting of the votes commenced on 14.12.2021. Consequently, the result was announced and the petitioner has been declared as successful. It was found that writ petitioner secured 14092 votes whereas Umesh Nat (respondent no.6) and Ajay Sah (respondent no.5) secured 2387 and 12716 votes respectively. The another candidate Ajay Kumar secured 3665 votes and Dilip Kumar Mandal secured 2117 votes. The margin of the defeat of the election petitioner (respondent no.5) by the petitioner was 1376 votes. Thereafter the petitioner took oath as a returned candidate to the Constituency No.12.

6. The respondent no. 5 (Ajay Sah) aggrieved by the result of the election, filed Election Suit No. 02 of 2022 in the Court of learned Sub-Judge-I, Civil Court, Benipatti on the ground that respondent no.6 contested the election on the forged and fabricated caste certificate.

7. It is the case of election petitioner-respondent no.5 that on 27.11.2021, he filed objection before the Collector at the time of scrutiny of nomination paper of respondent no.6, mentioning therein that respondent no.6 belongs to Nat by caste, which falls in the category of Scheduled Caste, but on the basis of forged caste certificate produced by him, is contested the election for the Territorial Constituency no.12 and, thus, prayed for cancellation of the nomination of respondent no.6. The aforenoted objection is shown to be received in the office on 29.11.2021.

8. Having found

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