Y.V.CHANDRACHUD, R.S.SARKARIA, P.N.BHAGWATI
C. M. Arumugam – Appellant
Versus
S. Rajgopal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
BHAGWATI, J.:— This appeal under S. 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 is directed against an order made by the High Court of Mysore setting aside the election of the appellant on the ground that the nomination paper of the 1st respondent was improperly rejected by the Returning Officer. This litigation does not stand in isolation. It has a history and that is necessary to be noticed in order to 941 appreciate the arguments which have been advanced on behalf of both parties in the appeal.
2. The appellant and the 1st respondent have been opponents in the electoral battle since a long time. The constituency from which they have been standing as candidates is 68 KGF Constituency for election to the Mysore Legislative Assembly. They opposed each other as candidates from this constituency in 1967 General Election to the Mysore Legislative Assembly. Now, the seat from this constituency was a seat reserved for Scheduled Castes and, therefore, only members of Scheduled castes could stand as candidates from this constituency. The expression "Scheduled Castes" has a technical meaning given to it by Cl. (24) of Article 366 of the Constitution and it means "such cast
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.