Back
2000(8) Supreme 12
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. A.S. Anand, CJI., S. Rajendra Babu & R.C. Lahoti, JJ.
Romesh -Appellant
versus
Ramesh K. Rana & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2718 of 1999
Decided on 18-1-2000
ORDER
The appellant was the returned candidate at the elections held to the Haryana Legislative Assembly. He was declared elected from 15 Gharaunda Constituency on 10th of May, 1996. The election of the appellant was challenged through an Election Petition filed by respondent No. 1. There were no allegations of commission of any corrupt practice. The challenge was based on alleged improper reception and/or rejection of votes. By an order dated 18th February 1999, the request of respondent No. 1 for recount of votes polled at the elections was accepted and certain directions were issued by the learned Designated Judge in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. An order was made for recount of the votes by the learned Designated Judge under the supervision and control of the District Judge (Vigilance), Punjab. After the recount, the election of the appellant was set aside and respondent No. 1 was declared duly elected. This appeal is by the aggrieved appellant.
2. We have refrained from referring to the pleadings of the parties or the issues framed in the case because of the developments which have subsequently taken place.
3. On 14th of December, 1999, the Haryana Legislative Assembly has been dissolved. Learned Counsel for the appellant rightly submits that since there were no allegations of commission of any corrupt practice, with the dissolution of the Haryana Legislative Assembly, nothing further survives for consideration, at this point of time, insofar as this appeal is concerned. We agree. The appeal is hereby, dismissed and the same is consigned to records. No costs.
Appeal dismissed.
***************
Parallel Citations of other Journals :
Romesh v. Ramesh K. Rana & Ors., 2000(8) Supreme 12
00018
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
