The central legal point established in the judgment is that challenges against the rejection of nominations should be through an election petition, as per Article 329(b) of the Constitution of India and Section 80 of the Representation of People Act, 1950.

HULUVADI G. RAMESH, J.

Mr. Niranjan Rajagopalan, learned counsel takes notice for the respondents.

2. Heard the petitioner in person and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order of the second respondent dated 24.3.2017 rejecting the nomination application of the petitioner.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that he has filed nomination application for contesting in R.K. Nagar Constituency for the election to be held on 12.04.2017. His nomination application was assigned Serial No.85. On the date of scrutiny, even though the candidates from major political parties were allotted more than one hour time, besides such of those candidates were permitted to make corrections, additions, deletions etc., because of non-mentioning of age by the petitioner in Form-2B, Part III in respect of 'B' Column, his application was rejected vide impugned order dated 24.3.2017, which is challenged in this writ petition.

5. The petitioner appearing in person submits that he has filed nomination application to contest in the by-election of R.K. Nagar Constituency. He submits that 24th March, 2017 was fixed for scrutiny of the applications. On that date, he was present before the respondent authorities and he was assigned Serial No.85. During scrutiny, major political parties were allotted more than one hour time and were permitted to make corrections, additions etc. When his turn comes, he was not allotted even two minutes time to make corrections and the second respondent simply rejected his nomination. He further submits that the moment the respondents handed over the rejection letter, the police who was standing nearby dragged him and pushed him out of hall. The scrutiny of the application was not done on proper application of mind. Therefore, he seeks interference of this Court.

6. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and the remedy open to the petitioner is to file election petition. He further submits that as per Article 329(b) of the Constitution of India, no election either to the Parliament or to the Legislature of a State shall be called in question except by an election petition. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the respondents relies upon the judgment of the Apex Court in N.P. Ponnuswami v. The Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency, Namakkal, Salem District and others, AIR (39) 1952 Supreme Court 64.

7. For an election to R.K. Nagar Constituency, the petitioner in person and others have filed nominations. On 24.3.2017, the Returning Officer took up for scrutiny the nomination paper of the petitioner and others. At that time, the Returning Officer found that in Form-2B, Part-III in respect of 'B' column, the age of the petitioner was not mentioned, which resulted in rejecting the nomination application of the petitioner.

8. The operative portion of the impugned order of the Returning Officer reads as under:-

“Your election nomination Form No.85 was considered carefully and the following order is passed:

In the election nomination form in part III there is no mention of your age under oath. Not filling up the age in the election nomination form is a big mistake and is sufficient enough to reject nomination. The contention of the candidate that since he has mentioned his true age in the affidavit together with his nomination is in order is not acceptable, since as per the Constitution of India the eligible age is 25 years and therefore your nomination is rejected.”

9. Before proceeding further, it is relevant to refer to Article 329(b) of the Constitution of India and Section 80 of the Representation of People Act, 1950, which read as under:-

“Article 329 - Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters - Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution - (b) no election to either House of Parliament or to the House or either House of the Legislature of a State shall be called in question excep