Back
2000 (1) JLJ 108
S.P. Srivastava, Election Judge
Jaibhan Singh Pawaiya v. Shri Madhavrao Scindhia and others.
Election Petition No.4 of 1998; Decided on 18.8.1999.
(2) Constitution of India--Art. 329 -- Representation of the People Act. 1951 -- Ss. 80 and 87 -- no election to either house -- can he called in question except by an election petition presented according to law. [Para 10]
(3) Representation of the People Act, 1951--S 80--presentation of election petition -- procedure not prescribed in Act or Rules made thereunder -High Court has power to frame Rules as its constitutional obligation and statutory duty [Para 10 & 24]
(4) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S 80 -- right to challenge an election -- is a special right conferred under a self contained special law -it is circumscribed by its provisions. AIR 1974 SC 1185 followed. [Para 12]
(5) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 80 -- election petition -cannot be equated with a plaint in civil suit -- election petition challenging election of a successful candidate -- must strictly conform to requirements of law. [Para 12]
(6) Constitution of India -- Arts. 225 and 329 (b) -- rules relating to presentation of election petition -- have been framed by the High Court to carry out the object envisaged under Art. 329 (b) as ‘prescribed manner. [Para 16]
(7) High Court Rules and Orders (M.P.) -- Rules Relating to Election Petition -- have been framed separately for specific purpose. [ Para 18]
(8) Constitution of India -- Art. 348 (2) -- notification dated 18.9.1971 providing use of Hindi language -- is for general purpose of appeal and application -- such exemption does not apply to specific purpose of filing election petition. [Paras 19 & 20]
(9) Constitution of India -- Arts 225, 329(b) and 348 (2) -- Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- Ss. 80 and 87 -- provisions of Ss. 80 and 87 of the Act --provisions of Arts. 329 (b), 225 and 348(2) of the Constitution -- should not be read in such manner which may defeat the provisions of Art. 329(b). [Para 21]
(10) Constitution of India -- Art. 348(2) -- authorisation to use Hindi language also -- cannot take away statutory rigour of Rules prescribing use of English language for election petition. [Para 25]
(11) Constitution of India -- Art. 225 -- Rules framed by the High Court under -- have primacy over the others. 1988 JLJ 367 relied on. [Para 26]
(12) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S 80 -- election petition under --will be governed by the specific rules made for the purpose and by none also. AIR 1973 SC 2513 followed. [Para 27]
(13) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 87 -- Civil P.C. 1908-S 4 --election petition -- to be tried in accordance with provisions of Civil Procedure Code -- presentation of petition is governed by Rules framed by High Court -- it being special provision, provision to this extent in CPC stands superseded. [Para 28]
(14) Precedent -- like cases should be decided alike -- principle is not an absolute rule nor of universal application -- relevant decision or statutory provision not considered -- decision is per incuriom having no binding effect. E.P. No. 9/1980 dissented from. [Paras 33 & 34.]
(15) Precedent -- not every observation but only ratio decidendi is binding n case is only an authority for what it actually decides. AIR 1968 SC 647 followed. [Paras 35 & 36]
¼1½ mPp U;k;ky; fu;e rFkk vkns‘k ¼e-ç-½&fuokZpu vftZ;ksa esa lacaf/kr fu;e&fu-2¼[k½& &nksuksa esa ls fdlh enu ds ckor fuokZpu vthZ&mPp U;k;ky; dks bl fu;e ds vuqlkj mifLFkr dh tk ldrh gS&;g v¡xjsth Hkk"kk esa gh gksuk pkfg,A ¿iSjk 8 ¼2½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq-329& &yksd çfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951&/kkjk 80 rFkk 87&nksuksa esa ls fdlh lnu dk fuokZpu&fof/k ds vuqlkj miLFkkfir fuokZpu vthZ ds vfrfjDr ç‘uxr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¿iSjk 10 ¼3½ yksd çfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951&/kkjk 80&fuokZpu vthZ miLFkkfir dh tkuk&çfØ;k] vf/kfu;e vFkok mlds v/khu fojfpr fu;eksa esa fofgr ugha&mPp U;k;ky dks viuh lkafo/kkfud ck/;rk vkSj dkuwuh dk;Z ds :i esa fu;e fojfpr djus dh ‘kfDr gSA ¿iSjk 10 ,oa 24 ¼4½ yksd çfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951&/kkjk 80&fuokZpu ij vk{ksi djus dk vf/kdkj &Loaiw.kZ fo‘ks"k ds v/khu çnÙk fo‘ks"k vf/kdkj gS&og mlds mica/kksa esa lheko) gSA , vkb vkj 1974 ,l lh 1185 vuqlfjrA ¿iSjk 12 ¼5½ yksd çfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951&/kkjk 80&fuokZpu vthZ&flfoy okn esa okni= ls cjkcjh ugha dh tk ldrh&fdlh lQy vH;FkhZ ds fuokZpu ij vk{ksi dh fuokZpu vthZ&vfrfuefu"B :i ls fof/k dh vis{kkvksa ds vuq:i gksuk pkfg,A ¿iSjk 12 ¼6½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq- 225 rFkk 329¼[k½&fuokZpu vthZ miLFkkfir fd, tkus ls lacaf/kr fu;e&mPp U;k;ky; }kjk vuq- 329¼[k½ ds v/khu ifjdfYir mís‘; dk;kZfUor djus ds fy, ^fofgr jhfr* ds :i esa fojfpr fd, x, gSaA ¿iSjk 16 ¼7½ mPp U;k;ky; fu;e rFkk vkns‘k ¼e-ç-½&fuokZpu vthZ ls lacaf/kr fu;e&fofufnZ"V ç;kstu ds fy, i`FkDr~% fojfpr fd, x, gSaA ¿iSjk 18 ¼8½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq- 348¼2½&fganh Hkk"kk dk ç;ksx micaf/kr djus okyh vf/klwpuk fnukad 18-9-1971&vihy vkSj vkosnu ds lkekU; ç;kstu ds fy, gS&,slh NwV fuokZpu vthZ Qkby fd, tkus ds fofufnZ"V ç;kstu dks ykxw ugha gSA ¿iSjk 19 ,oa 20 ¼9½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq- 225] 329 ¼[k½ rFkk 348¼2½&yksd çfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951&/kkjk 80 rFkk 87&vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 80 rFkk 87 ds v/khu mica/k&lafo/kku ds vuq- 329¼[k½] 225 rFkk 348¼2½ ds mica/k&fuoZpu bl jhfr ls ugha fd;k tkuk pkfg, fd ftlls vuq- 329 ¼[k½ ds mica/k foQy gks tk,aA ¿iSjk 21 ¼10½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq- 348¼2½&fganh Hkk"kk Hkh ç;qDr fd, tkus dk çkf/kdj.k&fuokZpu vthZ ds fy, v¡xjsth Hkk"kk fufgr djus okys fu;eksa dh vfrfu;efu"Bk ?kVk ugha nsrkA ¿iSjk 25 ¼11½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq- 225&ds v/khu mPp U;k;ky; }kjk fojfpr fu;e&vUksa ls çeq[krk çkIr gSA 1988 ts ,y ts 367 voyafcrA ¿iSjk 26 ¼12½ yksd çfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951&/kkjk 80&fuokZpu vthZ&bl ç;kstu ds fy, fojfpr fofufnZ"V fu;eksa }kjk ‘kkflr gksxh] vU; fdlh }kjk ughaA , vkb vkj 1973 ,l lh 2513 vuqlfjrA ¿iSjk 27 ¼13½ yksd çfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951&/kkjk 87&flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908&/kkjk 4& &fuokZpu vthZ&fopkj.k] flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk ds mica/kksa ds vuqlkj fd;k tkuk gksxk&vthZ dk miLFkkiu mPp U;k;ky; }kjk fojfpr fu;eksa }kjk gksxk&;g fo‘ks"k mica/k gksus ls flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk dk mica/k] bl lhek rd vf/kØkar gSA ¿iSjk 28 ¼14½ iwoZ fu.kZ;&leku ekeys leku :i ls fu.khZr fd, tkuk pkfg,&loZlkfoZd :i esa ykxw gksus okyk fuckZ/k fu;e ugha gSa&lqlaxr fu.kZ; vFkok dkuwuh mica/k ij fopkj ugha fd;k x;k&fu.kZ vuo/kkurk ds dkj.k gS] mldk çHkko vkc)dj ughaA fuokZpu vthZ Ø-9 1980 folEerA ¿iSjk 33 ,oa 34 ¼15½ iwoZ fu.kZ;&çR;sd leqfDr ugha] fdarq dsoy fofu‘p; vk/kkj gh vkc)dj gSa&ekeyk dsoy mlds fy, gh çkf/kdkj iw.kZ fu.kZ; gS tks mlesa okLro esa fu.khZr fd;k x;k gSaA , vkb vkj 1968 ,l lh 647 vuqlfjrA ¿iSjk 35 ,oa 36
1. This is an application filed by the respondent No. 1 seeking dismissal of the election petition asserting that the petitioner was required to present the election petition in English language only and since it had been filed in Hindi language, it was not in accordance with law, the election petition deserved to be dismissed.
2. On 5.2.1999, a learned Single Judge of this Court to whom the election petition stood assigned under section 86(2) of the Representation of the People Act 1951, after hearing the counsel for the contesting respondent had granted time to the counsel for the petitioner as prayed for to file the objections.
3. A reply to the aforesaid application containing the objections was filed on 10.3. 1999 asserting that there was no provision in the Representation of the People Act and the Rules framed thereunder requiring that an election petition should be filed in any particular language. It was further asserted that in the absence of any provision in that Act or rules, the non-compliance of rule 2 (b) of the High Court Rules could not be a ground for the dismissal of the election petition. Reliance was placed in this connection on an order passed in Election Petition NO.9 of 1980 (Devilal S/o Shriran1 Khadav v. Kinkar Nannada Prasad and others) decided by a learned Single Judge of this Court at Indore Bench on 21.2.1981.
4. Since the learned Single Judge who had passed the order dated 5.2. 1999 has demitted the office under a fresh order assignment the election petition stands assigned to me.
5. The learned counsel for the parties were heard on this application before proceeding further with the petition on 30.7.1999.
6. The provisions contained in section 87 (1) of the Representation of the People Act, 19.51, stipulate that subject to the provisions of the said Act and of any rules made thereunder, every election petition shall be tried by the High Court, as nearly as may be, in accordance with the procedure applicable under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
7. However, Section 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, provides as follows:
"4. Savings -- (1) In the absence of any specific provision to the contrary nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect any special or local law now in force or any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form of procedure prescribed, by or under any other law for the time being in force."
(2) ....... ....... ........"
8. In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 225 of the Constitution of India and all other powers including those envisaged under the notification issued by the Chief Justice under section 51 of the State Re-Organisation Act. 1956, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh had framed, the rules relating to the Election Petitions presented before it as provided under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. These Rules were published in the Madhya Pradesh Gazette Extraordinary dated 22.2.1967. Rule 2 of the aforesaid Rules provides as under:
"2. Every Election petition shall be --
(a) Typewritten or printed fairly and legibly on white foolscap size paper of reasonable quality, one side of the paper only being used, leaving a quarter margin on the left and at least 1/2 inches open space on the top and bottom of each sheet,
(b) Written in the English language, numbering separately the paragraph thereof,
(c) Couched in proper language, and in conformity with section 81,82 and 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951."
9. Article 329 sub-clause (b) of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, as contained in sections 80 and 87 of the said Act, provides as follows:
"329. Bar to interference by Courts in electoral matters. --
(a) ..............................
(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 except by an election petition presented to such authority and
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
