JUDGMENT

CHANDRACHUD, CJI.:— These three Election Petitions are filed under S. 14 of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act. 1952 to challenge the election of Respondent 1. Giani Zail Singh. as the President of India. The election to the office of the President of India was held on July 12. 1982. In all. 36 candidates had filed nomination papers including Shri Charan Lal Sahu who is the Petitioner in Petition No. 2 of 1982 and Shri Nem Chandra Jain who is the Petitioner in Election Petition No. 3 of 1982. The Returning Officer accepted the nomination papers of two candidates only: Giani Zail Singh and Shri H. R. Khanna. a retired Judge of this Court. The result of the election was Published in the Extraordinary Gazette of India on July 15. 1982 declaring Giani Zail Singh as the successful candidate. He took oath of office on July 25. 1982.

2. We will first take up for consideration Election Petition, 2 and 3 of 1982 which are filed respectively by Shri Charan Lal Sahu and Shri Nem Chandra Jain both of whom, incidentally are Advocates

Election Petitions Nos. 2 & 3 of 1982:-

3. In Petition No. 2 of 1982. the Petitioner asks for the following reliefs:

"(1) That the Constitutional Eleventh Amendment Act 1961 be declared ultra vires of the Constitution.

(2) That the Ss. 5B (6) and 5C. 21 (3) of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act 1952 (Amended) with Election Rules 1974 be declared, illegal. void and unconstitutional. under Art. 58 of the Constitution.

(3) That the post of Prime Minister and other Ministers be declared that they are in office of profit hence they have played undue influence in the election of the returned candidate.

(4) That the election of the (Returned Candidate) Respondent No. 1 be declared void and nomination of respondent No. 2 be declared illegally accepted thus the Petitioner be declared as elected as President under the Constitution as stated in the petition under S. 18 of the Act.

(5) That the above system of election of President is bad and unconstitutional therefore it should be held directly in future by all the electorals and Union of India be directed to amend Arts. 54. 55 and 56 of the Constitution of India

(6) That Ss. 4 (1) (2). 5. 6. 7 & 11 of the Salaries and Allowances of Ministers Act 1952 (Act No. 58 of 1952) along with Ss. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 and 9 of the Salaries and Allowances of Members of Parliament Act. 1954 be declared void and unconstitutional." (Advisedly. we have not touched up the prayer-clauses.)

4. In Petition No. 3 of 1982. the petitioner prays that the election of Respondent 1 be set aside, on the various grounds mentioned in the Petition.

5. Apart from making several vague. loose and offhand allegations the petitioners, allege that Respondent 1 exercised undue influence over the voters through his confidants. We do not consider it necessary to reproduce those allegations since we are of the opinion that these petitions are not maintainable.

6. A preliminary objection is taken to the maintainability of these petitions by Shri Asoke Sen who appears on behalf of. Respondent 1 and by the learned Attorney-General. They contend that 312 either of the two petitioners was a "candidate" within the meaning of Section 13 (1) of the Act and since, under S. 14A an election petition can be filed only by a person who was a candidate at the election, the petitioners have no standing to file the petitions and therefore, the petitions must be dismissed as not maintainable.

7. Since the petitioners contested their alleged lack of locus to file the petitions, the following issue was framed by us as a preliminary issue in each of the two election petitions :

"Does the petitioner have no locus standi to maintain the petition on the ground that he was not a candidate within the meaning of S. 13 (a) read with S. 14A of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act, 1952?"

8. Section 14 of the Act provides by sub-sec. (1) that no election shall be called in question except by present