BHAGWAN DASS SEHGAL versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1975] 2 S.C.R. 580 · Decided: 05-11-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A. ALAGIRISWAMI · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

580 
BHAGWAN DASS SEHGAL 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
November 5, 1974 
[A, ALAGIRISWAMI AND R. S. SARKARIA, JJ.] 
Cons1ituti11n of India, 1950, Article 14 and 191-0ffice of Chairman of 
Improvement Trust, if office of profit-Removal of disqualification-If amounts 
to discrimination. 
Jn the contest for election to the Haryana Legislative Assembly one 
of 
the respondents, who was the Chairman of the Ambala Improvement Trust, 
was declared elected. The apJ,lllllE,nt challenged the election on. the grounds that : 
(i) the respondent's nomination was improperly and illegally accepted because 
he. was holding an office of profit under the State Government, and (ii) s. 
2(1) of the Punjab State Legislature (Prevention and Disqualification) Act, 1952, 
introduced by the Haryana Amending Act .25 of 1969, enacted by the Haryana 
State Legislature under Art. 191 of the Constitution which purported to take 
the office of the Chairman of an Improvement Trust out of the purview of 
an office of profit, was invalid as it offended Art. 14 of the Constitution. 
The High Court dismissed the petition. 
Dismissing the appeal to thi!I Court, 
HELD : (1 ) The office of the Chairman of an Improvement Trust consti-
tuted under the Punjab Town Improvement AcU is an office of profit, 
but 
s. 2(i) provided that such a person does not incur the disqualification 
for 
being chosen as and for being a member ot the Haryana State Legislative 
Assembly. [581H-582B] 
(2)(a) Article 191(1){a) of the Constitution gives a wide power to the 
State· Legislature to declare by law woot office or offices of profit held under 
the government sha!J not disqualify the holder thereof from being chosen . or 
for being a member of the State Legislature. Classification .is thus left pri-
marily to legislative discretion and when this power is exercised reasonably 
in a manner which does not drain out the article of its real content the court 
will not interfere. 
[582H-583B] 
(b) There is no discrimination between the chairman of the trust and the 
members of the trust. Jn the case of the members of the trust the disquali-
fication on the ground of their holding the office qf profit had been removed 
by s. 2 ( e) of the 1952-Act. 
(c) Further, the status and 11:sponsibilities and other conditions of the office 
of the Chairman of an Improvement Trust differ from those of the members 
of the trust or other statutory bodies, and therefore, the mere fact that for 
the purpose of removing the disqualification the Chairmen have been put in 
cl. (i) as a class separate from that of the members of the Trust and other 
statutory bodies in cl. (e) of s. 2 does not offend the guarantee of equal 
treatment. [582G] 
CIV1L APPELLATE JuJRrsorcnoN : Civil Appeal No. 1188 of 1973. 
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment & Order dated the 
11th October, 1972 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in C.W. No. 
2490 cif 1970 and Civil Appeal No. 1 of 1973. 
Frnm the Judgment & Oi:der dated the 30th October, 1972 of the 
Punjnb Haryana High Court in Election Petition No. 19 of 1972. 
D. V. Patel, S. S. Khanduja and S. K. Jai11 for the appellant (In 
both the appeals) 
A 
B 
c 
I> 
E 
F 
G 
H 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
B. D. SEHGAL v. HARYANA (Sarkaria, /.) 
581 
V. M. Tarkunde, V. C. Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey for respon-
dent No. 1 (In CA No. 1188/73. 
Uma Datta for respondents Nos.· 2 (In CA. No. 1188/73.) and 
respondent No. 1 (In C.A. No. 1 of 1973). 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
SAWRIA J.-The common question that arises for determination 
in these appeals is : Whether Clause ( i) in Section 2 of the Punjab 
State Legislature (Prevention of Disqualification) Act 7 of 1952 
(hereinafter referred to as the Disqualification Act) 
inserted 
by 
Haryana Amendment Act 25 of 1969 suffers from the vice of discri-
mination and as such, is an invalid piece of legislation ? Both these 
appeals will therefore be disposed of by this judgment. 
The appellant and respondents, as rival candidates, contested the 
election to Haryana Legislative Assembl1y from Ambala Cantonment 
Constituency in March 1972. Hans Raj Suri, Respondent was declar-
ed elected. The appellant, Bhagwan Dass Sehgal challenged this Res-
pondent's election on the ground that his nomination papers had been 
improperly and illegally accepted. It was alleged that on the material 
dates, the respondent being a Chairman of the Ambala Improvement 
Trust was holding an office of profit under the Government
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.