Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY
Shakti Rani Das Daughter Of Dhananjay Das – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred inter-alia to assail an Order dated 23.08.2022 passed in Misc. [J] Case no. 44/2022, arising out of Misc. [Election] Petition no. 5/2022, by the learned District Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur. By the Order dated 23.08.2022, the learned District Judge dismissed the application, Misc. [J] Case no. 44/2022, which was preferred by the present writ petitioner as the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of the period of delay which had occurred in filing an election petition, which was registered and numbered as Misc. [Election] Petition no.5/2022.
2. The preceding events which have led the writ petitioner to prefer the writ petition can be exposited, in brief, at first.
3. On 09.02.2022, the State Government issued a Notification for election of ward commissioners to the Municipal Boards in the entire State of Assam. Dhekiajuli Municipal Board was one of the Municipal Boards where elections for the ward commissioners were to be held. The petitioner being a Scheduled Castes [SC] category candidate, desired to contest the election for the
The provisions of the Limitation Act, particularly Section 5, are not applicable to election petitions under the Assam Municipal Act, as it is a self-contained code governing its own limitations.
The provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act do not apply to election petitions under the U.P. Municipalities Act, as governed by special procedural laws.
The Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to election petitions under the U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Act, and petitions filed beyond the specified timeframe are not maintainable.
The limitation period for election petitions under the Representation of the People Act is strict and cannot be extended, and claims of fraud must be substantiated with evidence.
The Representation of People Act, 1951 mandates strict adherence to the limitation period for filing election petitions, and non-compliance results in dismissal without consideration of merits.
The election petition was dismissed for being filed beyond the 45-day limit set by the Representation of People Act, 1951, with no provision for condonation of delay.
Election petitions must comply with mandatory provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, including timely filing and joining necessary parties, or they will be dismissed.
The court established that the filing of an election petition must be strictly interpreted in accordance with the statutory time limits, and procedural delays in registration do not invalidate a time....
Timeliness is crucial in election petitions; even minimal delay is not condonable, leading to automatic dismissal under the Representation of People Act, 1951.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
