SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1969 Supreme(SC) 282

A.N.RAY, K.S.HEGDE
Baidyanath Panjiar – Appellant
Versus
Sitaram Mahto – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant :M.Y. Bhat, Advocate
For the Respondents: R.A. Khan, AAG

Judgment

HEGDE, J.:- The principal question raised in this appeal under S. 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act) is as to the scope of S. 23 (3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (to be hereinafter referred to as the 1950 Act). A few subsidiary contentions have also been canvassed. They will be considered at the appropriate stage.

2. The election petition from which this appeal arises relates to the Darbhanga Local Authorities Constituency of the Bihar Legislative Council. The calendar for the election for that constituency was as follows:

1. Last date for filing nomination papers - 2-4-1968.

2. Date of scrutiny of nomination papers - 4-4-1968.

3. Last date for withdrawal of candidatures - 6-4-1968.

4. Date of poll - 28-4-1968.

5. Date of declaration of result - 29-4-1968.

3. Originally five candidates submitted their nominations for the election in question. On scrutiny all of them were held to have been validly nominated. Two of them later withdrew their candidatures within the period prescribed leaving in the field Shri Baidyanath Panjira, the appellant therein, Shri Raj Kumar Mahaseth, respondent No. 2 and Shri Gangadh



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top