Shakuntala Singh v. Dauram Ratankar and Others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2003 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 3

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
Chinnappa Reddy, J
Shakuntala Singh v. Dauram Ratankar and Others

Table of Content
1. validity of joined parties in election petition (Para 2 , 3)
2. exclusion of non-candidates as respondents (Para 4 , 5)
3. interpretation of statutory provisions s.82 (Para 6)
4. court's overall conclusion on the petition (Para 8)

1. Heard.

2. One of the issues (No. 3) framed in the case is whether the Returning Officer is a proper party, if so effect?

3. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 raised objection in paragraph 19 of the written statement, which reads as under :
"That all the allegations in the petition are made against the Returning Officer that he has not fairly and impartially discharged his official duty. The petitioner also made the absurd allegations that the respondent No. 1 pressurized the Returning Officer during the counting. It is humbly submitted that the respondent No. 1 does not belong to a party, which has a government in Madhya Pradesh. The entire allegations of unfairness and favouritism during the counting were made against the returning officer. Therefore, though the Returning Officer is not a necessary party but a proper party in this Election Petition to answer and rebut the allegations made against him. Therefore, on this ground alone