A. Chinnappa Vs. V. Venkataramuni & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 13182 of 1987.
(In C.A.No.1261/87)
(In C.A.No.1261/87)
Petitioner: A. Chinnappa
Respondent: V. Venkataramuni & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 13182 of 1987.
(In C.A.No.1261/87)
(In C.A.No.1261/87)
Judges: A.P. SEN & B.C. RAY, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Aug 14, 1987
Appearances:
Mr. Shanti Bhushan, Sr. Advocate & Mr. Madan Lokur for the Petitioners.
Mrs. C.K. Sucharita, Mr. Ranjit Thomas Advocates for the Respondents.
Mrs. C.K. Sucharita, Mr. Ranjit Thomas Advocates for the Respondents.
Head Note:
REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1951:
Improper acceptance of appellant’s nomination – Order of High Court setting aside the election of the appellant stayed.
Cases Reffered:
1.Kripal Singh v. Uttam Singh, A.I.R. 1986 SC 300.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. We admit the appeal. The hearing of the appeal is expedited.
2. Meanwhile, the operation of the judgment of the High Court shall remain stayed subject to the following terms and conditions:
The appellant shall be entitled to attend the State Legislative Assembly and sign the register, to participate in the debates and to draw his remuneration; but he shall not exercise his right of voting.
3. We have departed from the practice of passing orders of stay on the usual terms in view of the observations made in the recent judgment of a Constitution Bench of this Court in KRIPAL SINGH V. UTTAM SINGH, A.I.R. 1986 SC 300, that in a case where an election is set aside for no fault of the returned candidate, such as a corrupt practice committed by him or his agent or a disqualification suffered by him, but on the ground that some one else’s nomination had been improperly rejected, the more appropriate order would perhaps be to grant as absolute stay so that the Constituency may not go unrepresented for no fault of the elected Member. In this case, however, the election of the appellant has been set aside on the ground of improper acceptance of his nomination. That being so we have instead of passing an absolute order of stay imposed the conditions set out above.
1. We admit the appeal. The hearing of the appeal is expedited.
2. Meanwhile, the operation of the judgment of the High Court shall remain stayed subject to the following terms and conditions:
The appellant shall be entitled to attend the State Legislative Assembly and sign the register, to participate in the debates and to draw his remuneration; but he shall not exercise his right of voting.
3. We have departed from the practice of passing orders of stay on the usual terms in view of the observations made in the recent judgment of a Constitution Bench of this Court in KRIPAL SINGH V. UTTAM SINGH, A.I.R. 1986 SC 300, that in a case where an election is set aside for no fault of the returned candidate, such as a corrupt practice committed by him or his agent or a disqualification suffered by him, but on the ground that some one else’s nomination had been improperly rejected, the more appropriate order would perhaps be to grant as absolute stay so that the Constituency may not go unrepresented for no fault of the elected Member. In this case, however, the election of the appellant has been set aside on the ground of improper acceptance of his nomination. That being so we have instead of passing an absolute order of stay imposed the conditions set out above.
