9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (8) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubsidiary 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 : 3. Originally five candidates submitted their nomination 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 Panjiar, the appellant herein, Shri Raj Kumar Mahaseth, respondent No. 2 and Shri Gangadhar, respondent No. 3. There were six polling stations in the constituency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the electoral roll was amended on the 27th April, 1968, just a day prior to the polling. As per the amended electoral roll, there were 39 electors in the Dalsingsarai polling station. Only four of them stood registered in the electoral roll as it stood on April 2, 1968. 12 of those who were electors under the original roll were removed from the roll. 33 out of the 39 electors included in the electoral roll relating to Dalsingsarai polling station exercised their franchise during the poll on April 28, 1968. 5. The question for consideration is whether it was within the competence of the electoral registration officer to amend the electoral rolls after the last date for making the nomination was over. 6. Provisions relating to the prep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the superintendence, direction and control of the Election Commission. Section 16 enumerates what disqualifications will disentitle a person from being enrolled as a voter. Section 18 provides that no person shall be entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for any constituency more than once. Section 18 enunciates the principle one person-one vote . Section 22 provides for correction of entries in the electoral rolls. Section 23(1) permits a person whose name is omitted from the rolls to apply for inclusion. Sub-section (2) of Section 23 authorises the electoral registration officer to include the name of the applicant in the rolls if he is satisfied that he is entitled to be registered. The object of the aforementioned provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st date for making the nominations for election in that constituency and before the completion of that election. Section 23(3) does not deal with any mode or procedure in the matter of registering the voters. It interdicts the concerned officers from interfering with the electoral rolls under the prescribed circumstances. It puts a stop to the power conferred on them. Therefore it is not a question of irregular exercise of power but a lack of power. 8. It was next urged by Mr. Goburdhan, learned Counsel for the appellant that Section 23(3) of the 1950 Act is subject to Section 27(2) of the same Act and therefore in view of the direction issued by the electoral registration officer to include the names of the electors in question, it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the date of the polling ? For answering that question we have to go back to Section 23(3) of the 1950 Act. In view of that provision the electoral roll referred to in Section 62(1) of the Act must be understood to be the electoral roll that was in force on the last day for making the nominations for the election. 10. It was next urged that even if we hold that in including fresh electors in the electoral roll on April 27, 1968, the electoral registration officer contravened Section 23(3) of the 1950 Act, the same cannot be made a ground for invalidating the election as the contravention in question does not come within the purview of Sub-section (1) of Section 100 of the Act. This contention again does not appear to be sound. Clause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing would have been the position : No material was placed before us to show that this conclusion was wrong. There was some controversy about two votes but we do not think it necessary to go into the same as any decision as regards their validity will not affect the final conclusion. 11. Before leaving this case, it is necessary to mention that at one stage of the arguments, the learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the decision of this Court in B.M. Ramaswamy v. B.M. Krishnamurthy and Ors. [1963]3SCR479 governs the facts of this case. But after some discussion he gave up that contention. The ratio of that decision has no relevance for our present purpose. In that case, the High Court came to the conclusion that the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
