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

1985 Supreme(Cal) 408

A.K.SENGUPTA
Subhendu Kumar Chowdhury – Appellant
Versus
Phani Bhusan Roy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.K. Lala, S.K. Ganguli,

JUDGMENT

1. THIS election petition was filed by the election petitioner challenging the election of the Respondent from 45 Maldah (Scheduled Caste) Legislative assembly Constituency held on 19th May, 1982. The case of the election-petitioner is that during the scrutiny of the nomination papers objection was taken by the petitioner to the nomination of the Respondent on the ground that the Respondent was not qualified to be chosen to fill the seat under the pro visions of Article 332 of the Constitution of India and under section 5 (a) of the Representation of the people Act, 1951 inasmuch as the Respondent was not a member of any of the Scheduled Castes. In support of the aforesaid objection, documentary as well as oral evidence was led by the petitioner before the returning Officer to establish that the Respondent was a caste hindu belonging to the caste or sub-caste "saha" which is not a Scheduled Caste as declared by the President of India under article 341 of the Constitution of India. Evidence was led by the petitioner that in old documents the father of the Respondent was described as belonging to Maheswari Vaisya caste. The Respondent, however, claimed that he belonged to the


































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top