1. The petitioner being a registered voter of the Rewari Assembly Constitutency contested election from the said Constituency in the general election for which polling was held on 22-2-2000. Cap. Ajay Singh, respondent herein, was declared elected on account of his having secured the highest votes. The petitioner Vijay Somani polled 21, 112 votes i.e. the second highest number of votes. Being dissatisfied with the election of the respondent, the petitioner filed the instant election petition under S.80, 81 read with Ss. 100 and 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for setting aside the election of Capt. Ajay Singh i.e. the respondent from the Rewari Assembly Constitutency to the Haryana Lesgislative Assembly.

2. Consequent upon the filing of the written statement and the replication, this Court on 15-11-2000 framed the following four preliminary issues :-

1) Whether the Election Petition is liable to be rejected U/O 7 Rule, 11 of C. P. C. having lacking in material facts and particulars in view of the preliminary objections? OPR 2) Whether paras 2 to 6 (A) to (F) of the Election Petition are liable to be struck off the pleadings u/S 6 Rule, 16 of the C. P.C. as no cause of action is disclosed and there is no triable issue made out? OPR 3) Whether the Election Petition is not properly verified in accordance with law? If so, what is its effect ? OPR 4) Whether the affidavit filed with the Election Petition is defective and is not an affidavit in the eyes of law ? If so, what is its effect ? OPR C. M. No. 5-E of 2001 was filed on behalf of the respondent for framing an additional preliminary issue. The aforesaid C. M. was allowed on 17-5-2001, whereupon issue No. 5 was framed as under :-

50. Whether a true copy of the election petition has not been supplied to the returned candidate/ respondent, and if so, with what effect? Issue Nos. 1 and 2 :

3 Arguments on issues Nos. 1 and 2 were addressed collectively. The same are accordingly being disposed of together on account of the fact that the subject matter of the aforesaid two issues is the same.

4. It is asserted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the contents of sub-paragraphs (A) to (F) of paragraph 6 of the election petition are vague and lack material facts as well as material particulars. On the basis of the aforesaid assertion, it is contended that the election petition deserves to be dismissed at the outset under the provisions of Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure as the petition does not disclose a cause of action. It is submitted that as the election petition does not disclose any cause of action, the trial of the instant petition would be an abuse of the process of law. Additionally, it is submitted that paragraphs 2 to 6 (A) to (F) of the election petition are liable to be struck off the pleadings in terms of the provision of Order VI, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

5. To substantiate his claim that the petition does not disclose material facts, learned counsel for the respondent has illustratively referred to the averments made in para 6 (A) of the petition. The same is being extracted hereunder for facility of reference :-

"That the respondent visited Mohalla Sanghi Ka Bas on 17-2-2000 in the evening at about 6.30 PM for a nukad (Corner) meeting and got collected all the inhabitants of the locality for the purpose of soliciting their votes. On the appeal made by the respondent, the voters/inhabitants of Sanghi ka Bas complained about poor condition of a small patch of road running into 1400-1500 ft in length in their Mohalla Sanghi ka Bas. The respondent assured the voters collected there that if they promise to vote for him on 22-2-2000 then he would get the road cemented before elections and that the work for the purpose would be started immediately. Upon this inducement the voters of the locality promised in one voice to vote for the respondent if the construction work of the proposed cemented road was start