Back
1972 Supreme(Ori) 271
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
R.N. Misra, B.C. Das, JJ.
SUBAL CHARAN JENA AND BRUNDABAN SABU - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
O.J.C. Nos. 178 and 182 of 1969
Decided On : 14-02-1972
D. Sahu, for the Appellant; G. Rath and R.K. Patra and Additional Government Advocate, for the Respondent
The amendment of the electoral roll was not contrary to law and the Petitioners were not entitled to quash the impugned action merely because they were prejudiced.
Headnote:
ELECTION LAW - ELECTORAL ROLL - AMENDMENT - VALIDITY - ORISSA MUNICIPAL ACT, 1950, SECTION 13 - ORISSA MUNICIPAL (COUNCILLORS) ELECTION RULES, 1950, RULES 3, 6, 7, 8-14, 16, 17, 20, 22 - REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1950, SECTION 23(3).
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners challenged the election to a particular ward of the Notified Area Council, alleging that the election officer allowed persons not in the originally published electoral roll to vote. The Petitioners lost by a small margin and argued that the corrections to the voters' list were made long after nominations were filed and shortly before the poll, depriving them of adequate canvassing time.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the amendment of the electoral roll was not contrary to law and that the Petitioners were not entitled to quash the impugned action merely because they were prejudiced.
Issues: Whether the amendment of the electoral roll was contrary to law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the statutory requirements of election law must be strictly observed, but that the law, as it stood in 1969, did not debar the appropriate authority from correcting the electoral roll. Therefore, the corrections cannot be said to be without jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The court dismissed both writ petitions, but did not award any costs.
JUDGMENT :
R.N. Misra, J. - These are two applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the selection to a particular ward of the Notified Area council. The first case is in relation to the Bhadrak N.A.C. while the second one is in relation to the Banki N.A.C. The Petitioner in each of the two cases challenges the section of the appropriate election officer in permitting persons who were not in the originally published electoral roll to cast their votes at the election. It is alleged that the correction made to the voters' list was contrary to law and certainly prejudicial to the Petitioner. In the first case the number of such persons who came into the electoral roll belatedly is said to be 30 while in the second the number is stated to be 72. The Petitioner in each of the cases has lost by a small margin. It is contended that these corrections were made long after the nominations were filed and shortly before the actual poll. The candidates and at least the Petitioners were not aware of the fact that new names had been added to the voters list. Therefore, adequate canvassing has not been permitted. The democratic process itself has been interfered with.
2. Mr. Sahu who advanced a common set of arguments for the Petitioner in each of the two oases made reference to the provisions of Section 23 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. He concedes that there is no comparable provision in the Orissa Municipal Act. Sub-section (3) of Section 23 made the electoral roll final and prohibited any amendments after its final publication, and Section 24 only provided a right of appeal. Section 13 of the Orissa Municipal Act deals with the electoral roll and provides:
Except as otherwise provided in this Act or the rules made there under all persons registered by virtue of the Representation of the People Act, 43 of 1950 in as much of the electoral roll for any Assembly constituency for the time being in force as relates to the municipality shall be entitled to cast their votes at an election to the municipal council and the said portion of the roll shall be deemed to be the electoral roll of the municipality.
(2) So much of the electoral roll of the Municipality as relates to the area comprised within a ward thereof shall be embodied in a register to be maintained for the ward and such register shall be deemed to be the electoral roll for the ward for the purposes of this Act.
(3) The manner of splitting up of the electoral roll for the purpose of preparation of the aforesaid register, the manner of revision of such register from time to time and the officer or authority by whom such splitting up or revision Is to be carried out shall be as may be prescribed.
The prescription contemplated in Sub-section (3) is contained in a set of rules known as the Orissa. Municipal (Councillors) Election Rules 1950. Rule 3 provides for the preliminary electoral roll. Rules 6 provides for the publication and Rule 7 authorises making of claims and objections. Rules 8 to 14 provides for the disposal of such claims and objections. Rule 16 provides:
No failure to observe the dates prescribed by these rules or to observe other directions regarding the preparation or publication of any electoral roll shall entitle anyone to question the validity and conclusiveness of the roll in election proceedings.
Rule 17 provides:
The final electoral rolls of an the wards in a Municipality shall together form the complete electoral roll of the municipality.
Rule 20 deals with the amendment of electoral rolls. Prior to its amendment in March 1970 it provided:
(1) Notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, any person may apply for the amendment of any electoral roll for the time being in force by presenting an application in that behalf to the Election Officer.
(2) Where such an application is made for the correction of an existing entry in the electoral roll, the Election Officer may, if he is satisfied after making such enquiry as he deems
