Back
VIVEK RUSIA, AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)
State Of Madhya Pradesh Election Commission – Appellant
Versus
Krishna Bai W/o Dinesh Kumar Patidar – Respondent
ORDER :
VIVEK RUSIA, J.
The appellants (respondents No.2 to 4 in the writ petition) have filed the present writ appeal against order dated 20.6.2022 passed in W.P. No.13057/2022 whereby the learned Writ Court has directed them to allow the writ petitioner to cure the defects in nomination papers within 3 days and to proceed further as per the election program.
The facts of the case, in short, are as under :
1. The State Election Commission has declared the election program for Panchayat elections on 27.5.2022 under the provisions of Rule 31 of M.P. Panchayat Nirvachan Niyam, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as “Nirvachan Niyam, 1995” for short). The writ petitioner submitted her Nomination Form for contesting the election for the post of Surpanch for Gram Panchayat, Village Kotada Bujurg, Tehsil Garoth, District Mandsaur under UR Category . Undisputedly Apart from others documents, she was required to submit “No Dues Certificate” issued by the Electricity Company along with Nomination Form . Instead of submitting the No Dues Certificate in her name, she has submitted the No Dues Certificate issued in the name of her husband. The Nomination Form was scrutinized by the Returning Officer on
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the timing of court intervention in the election process, the fulfillment of essential qualifications by candidates, and the availability of r....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of a nomination form based on a technical defect that is not of a substantial character is not permissible under the law, and th....
The plenary powers of the Election Commission of India under Article 324 of the Constitution to correct errors or deficiencies in the electoral process and the limitation of judicial intervention at ....
The failure to rectify substantial defects in a nomination paper justifies its rejection under the Representation of People Act, 1951.
In election disputes, the Returning Officer must allow candidates to rectify nomination defects; appellate courts must not interfere post symbol allotment without subserving electoral integrity.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to contest an election is a statutory right, and the appropriate remedy for challenging the rejection of nomination papers is to fil....
The nomination was rightly rejected due to substantial defects which could not be corrected post-deadline, validating the Returning Officer’s actions.
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
