Back
1982 Supreme(Raj) 185
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Dwarka Prasad
SHRINIWAS - Appellant
Versus
KESHRI CHAND - Respondent
Civil Misc. Appeal 104 Of 1982
Decided On : 12/02/1982
B.R.MEHTA, M.C.SURANA, M.M.Singhvi, U.N.BHANDARI
A person receiving no vote at an election should be considered to have obtained the lowest number of votes and should be eliminated in the first round.
Headnote:
ELECTION - CHAIRMAN OF MUNICIPAL BOARD - VOTING - ELIMINATION OF CANDIDATE - INTERPRETATION OF "LOWEST VOTES" - ELECTION PETITION - MAINTAINABILITY - NON-JOINDER OF CONTESTING CANDIDATES.
Fact of the Case:
In an election for the office of Chairman of a Municipal Board, four candidates were duly nominated. After three rounds of voting, the respondent, Kesarichand, obtained the highest number of votes and was declared elected. The petitioner, Devkishan, who received no votes in the first round, challenged the election, arguing that he should not have been considered a candidate and that Gangadutt, who received the lowest number of votes in the first round, should have been eliminated instead. The Election Tribunal dismissed the election petition, and the petitioner appealed.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that a person receiving no vote at an election should be considered to have obtained the lowest number of votes and should be eliminated in the first round. The court interpreted the expression "lowest votes" in Rule 10 (8) (a) (ii) of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Election of Chairman, Vice-Chairman, President and Vice-President) Rules, 1959 to mean the smallest number of votes obtained by a candidate. The court also held that a contesting candidate does not cease to be a candidate merely because he does not obtain even a single vote at the time of poll, but can be eliminated by the procedure provided in Rule 10 (8) (a) (ii) of the Election Rules on the basis of having obtained the lowest votes.
Issues: 1. Whether a person receiving no vote at an election should be considered to have obtained the lowest number of votes and should be eliminated in the first round? 2. Whether a contesting candidate ceases to be a candidate merely because he does not obtain even a single vote at the time of poll? 3. Whether an election petition is maintainable in the absence of necessary parties, namely, all the contesting candidates?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted the expression "lowest votes" in Rule 10 (8) (a) (ii) of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Election of Chairman, Vice-Chairman, President and Vice-President) Rules, 1959 to mean the smallest number of votes obtained by a candidate. The court held that a person receiving no vote at an election should be considered to have obtained the lowest number of votes and should be eliminated in the first round. 2. The court held that a contesting candidate does not cease to be a candidate merely because he does not obtain even a single vote at the time of poll, but can be eliminated by the procedure provided in Rule 10 (8) (a) (ii) of the Election Rules on the basis of having obtained the lowest votes. 3. The court held that an election petition is not maintainable in the absence of necessary parties, namely, all the contesting candidates.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed. The parties were left to bear their own costs.
DWARKA PRASAD, J.
( 1 ) A short but interesting question as to whether a person receiving no vote at an election should be considered to have obtained the lowest member of votes or not arises in this case.
( 2 ) THE undisputed facts are that for the election to the office of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Nokha four persons were duly nominated as candidates. The voting was completed in three rounds and the votes obtained by each one of the four candidates in the three rounds ware as under :--Ist IInd IIIrd round round round 1. Kesarichand 5 5 8 2. Shri Niwas 7 8 7 Gangadutt 3 2 10 Dev Kishan 0 8 (e stands (or elimination)
( 3 ) THE respondent Kesarichand obtained the highest number of votes in the third round and as such he was declared elected to the office of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Nokha. The case of the petitioner-appellant is that Devkishan having received no vote in the first round, he should not have been considered at all to have been a candidate at the election and Gangadutt should have been eliminated in the first round on the basis of receiving the lowest number of votes and thus there should have been only two rounds and not three rounds.
( 4 ) IN his election petition the petitioner-appellant not only prayed that the election of Kesari Chand be set aside but he also claimed that he should be declared to have been duly elected as Chairman of the Municipal Board. Nokha, probably on the assumption that if, there would have been only two sounds he might have received the highest number of votes. The Munsif, Nokha, acting as the Election Tribunal, did not agree with the contention of the petitioner and dismissed the election petition filed by him. As such, the petitioner has come up in appeal before this Court.
( 5 ) THE election to the office of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Nokha is governed by the provisions of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Election of Chairman, Vice-Chairman, President and Vice-President) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Election Rules ). Rule 10, which is relevant for the present purpose, runs as under:-
"10. Voting and result of election:-- (1) The Returning Officer shall cause such arrangement to be made as will ensure the secrecy of the ballot. The Returning Officer shall after the voting is over, (a) open the ballot box and count the votes in the presence of such members as may be present and declare the result in the following manner,- (i) if there are only two candidates, the one who secures the larger: number, of votes shall be declared to have been elected. (ii) if there are more than two candidates, the one who obtains the lowest votes shall be eliminated and the votes taken again. If there is an equality of votes among all the candidates or if two or more candidates lowest on the list have obtained an equal number of votes the Returning Officer shall ascertain by lots in the presence of the members as to which of them shall be eliminated. The elimination shall be repeated until two candidates only are left, when votes shall be taken for the last time and candidates who secures the largest number of valid votes shall be declared to have been duly elected. In the event of there being an equality of votes at the final stage between the two remaining candidates, the Returning Officer shall draw lots in the presence of the members and the candidate whose name is first drawn shall be declared to have been duly elected. "
( 6 ) THUS, if there are only two candidates, the one who secured the highest number of votes will be declared to be duly elected; but if the number of candidates who are duly nominated is more than two, then the election has to take place by the process of elimination subject to the condition that only one candidate, who obtains the lowest votes, would be eliminated at one time and the votes would be taken again and thus the process of elimination shall be repeated until only two candidates are left in the field, when the votes would be tak
