Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. ILANGOVAN, J.
The State Election Commissioner, TamilNadu State Election Commission and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Deepa and Anr. – Respondents
C.R.P.(MD).Nos.1569 and 986 of 2023 and C.M.P.(MD).Nos.7695 and 4537 of 2023
Decided On : 22-03-2024
ELECTION LAW - REJECTION OF NOMINATION - TAMIL NADU PANCHAYATS ACT, 1994 - SECTIONS 37, 259; TAMIL NADU PANCHAYATS (ELECTION) RULES, 1995 - RULE 29 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 37(3)(f) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, which disqualifies candidates in arrears to a Panchayat, and Section 259(c), which allows for declaring elections void if a nomination is improperly rejected. The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with Rule 29(8) of the Election Rules, mandating that reasons for rejection be recorded and communicated to the candidate. The court found that the rejection of the nomination was improper due to lack of proper notice and failure to follow procedural requirements, influencing its decision to set aside the Election Court's order.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a civil revision petition challenging the rejection of Deepa's nomination for the post of President of Kallapalli Village in the 2019 elections. Her nomination was rejected on grounds of non-payment of dues to the Panchayat, which she contested, claiming improper rejection and lack of proper notice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rejection of Deepa's nomination was improper as the Assistant Returning Officer failed to provide a valid reason for the rejection and did not comply with the mandatory requirements of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Election) Rules. The court also noted that no surcharge proceedings had been initiated against her, which was necessary for disqualification under Section 37.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the rejection of Deepa's nomination was valid under the law, particularly in light of the alleged non-payment of dues and the procedural compliance of the Returning Officer.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rejection of the nomination was invalid due to non-compliance with procedural requirements, specifically the failure to provide a written statement of reasons for rejection as mandated by Rule 29(8). Additionally, the lack of initiation of surcharge proceedings meant that the disqualification under Section 37(3)(f) was not applicable.
Final Decision: The court set aside the Election Court's order and dismissed Election O.P.No.21 of 2020, allowing the revision petition filed by the 7th respondent and dismissing the Election Commission's petition as not maintainable.
ORDER :
(G. Ilangovan, J.)
(Prayer : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the entire records pertaining to the decretal order made in Election O.P.No.21 of 2020, dated 28.03.2023 on the file of the District Court, Karur and set aside the same.)
(Prayer : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records relating to the fair and decretal order dated 28.03.2023 made in Election O.P.No.21 of 2020 by the District Judge/Election Tribunal, Karur and set aside the same.)
These petitions have been filed against the fair and decretal order dated 28.03.2023 made in Election O.P.No.21 of 2020 by the District Judge/Election Tribunal, Karur.
2. Election for the Village Panchayat for Kallapalli Village, Krishnarayapuram Taluk, was held on 30.12.2019. Challenging the above said election, Election O.P.No.21 of 2020 was filed by one Deepa, who is the respondent herein.
3. The facts in brief:
The date of filing nomination was 16.12.2019, scrutiny was undertaken on 17.12.2019 at 10.00 a.m. Publication of Result of Election was effected on 03.01.2020. The Election Petitioner namely Deepa submitted nomination for the post of the President of Kallipalli Village on 14.12.2019. Second nomination was also filed on 16.12.2019. The respondent prepared the list of validly nominated candidates on 15.12.2019 excluding her name. It was prepared manually. But, the list was dated as 18.12.2019.
4. Without assigning any proper reason, she was informed that her nomination dated 14.12.2019 has been rejected. Enquiry made with the fourth respondent did not give any proper result. The respondents 3 and 4 illegally excluded the nomination of the Election Petitioner. Except the 7th respondent all other candidates withdrew their nominations. So the 7th respondent was elected uncontested.
5. A representation was made by the Election Petitioner to various Authorities. There was no reply or response. The representation was later forwarded to the second respondent for further action. That was also not properly considered. Several writ petitions have been filed by her seeking several reliefs. Only in pursuance of the order passed in W.P. (MD).No.362 of 2020, the third respondent gave the reply stating that there was an audit objection pertaining to the period 2014 – 2015. But, no surcharge proceedings have been initiated against her till the nomination papers were filed. So unless there is surcharge proceedings, disqualification under Section 37 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, will not arise. With these averments she filed the petition seeking the relief as stated above.
6. That was resisted by the official respondents and the elected candidate contending the following.
6.1. The Election Petitioner was the Panchayat President of Kallapalli Village during the period 2014 – 2015. During the audit, it found certain irregularities. In pursuance of the same, she was called upon to pay a sum of Rs.10,83,778/- on or before 05.08.2016 to the Panchayat. Till date that amount is not cleared.
6.2. On 17.12.2019, the other nominations namely Murali, Ananda Babu and Nagarajan made objections to the Assistant Returning Officer that the Election Petitioner is liable to pay the amount due to the Panchayat. On 17.12.2019, the Assistant Returning Officer asked the petitioner to submit her objections on or before 18.12.2019. Neither explanation or objection was made. So, the nomination was rejected under Section 37 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act.
7. Before the Election Court, the Election Petitioner herself was examined as PW1 and 13 documents have been marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P13. On the side of the respondents, three witnesses have been examined as RW1 to RW3 and 4 documents have been marked as Ex.R1 to Ex.R4. CW1 was examined as Court side witness.
8. At the conclusion of the enquiry process, the Election Court held that the rejection of the nomination paper of the Election
The right to contest an election is a statutory right, and the challenge to the rejection of nomination papers through a writ petition is not maintainable during the election process. The remedy of f....
The court upheld the returning officer's acceptance of a nomination despite omissions in the affidavit, determining these defects were not substantial and did not materially affect the election resul....
The court affirmed that challenges to election nominations must be made post-election through an election petition, as per Article 329(b) of the Constitution.
Mandatory disclosure of information by contesting candidates in Panchayat Raj elections, and the consequences of non-disclosure or suppression of information.
The burden of proof in election petitions alleging improper acceptance of nominations lies with the petitioner to show material effect on election results.
An election petition must contain specific pleadings to establish a cause of action, and cannot be dismissed at the preliminary stage if such pleadings are present, as the merits of the case should b....
The rejection of a nomination for a village panchayat election based on statutory qualifications is not remediable through a writ petition due to the bar under Article 243(O)(b) of the Constitution o....
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
