G.V. SREERAMA REDDY AND ANR. versus RETURNING OFFICER AND ORS.

Citation: [2009] 13 S.C.R. 245 · Decided: 11-08-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

" 
[2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 245 
G.V. SREERAMA REDDY AND ANR. 
v. 
RETURNING OFFICER AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 6269 of 2009) 
AUGUST 11, 2009 
[D.K. JAIN AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.] 
Representation of the People Act, 1951: s. 81 (1) -
Election petitioner has to be present personally at the time 
A 
B 
of presentation of election petition. 
C 
Interpretation of statutes: Special statute - Interpretation 
of - Held: Statute enacted for specific purpose must be 
measured from wordings of statutes and legislative intent 
behind it - Representation of the People Act, 1951. 
D 
The question which arose for consideration in the 
present appeal is whether the High Court was justified in 
upholding the objections of the Registry that there was 
no proper presentation of election petition in terms of 
section 81(1) of the Representation of the People Act as 
E 
the petitioner was not physically present at the time of 
presentation of election petition. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
. 
HELD: 1.1. Sub-section (1) of section 81 of the 
Representation of the People Act makes it clear that any 
challenge or dispute relating to an election may be 
presented in the form of an election petition highlighting 
F 
the grounds specified in sub-section (1) of Sections 100 
and 101. It further mandates that the election petition is G 
to be filed only before the High Court having jurisdiction 
either by any candidate or any elector within the 
prescribed time. Sub-section (1) also makes it clear that 
245 
H 
246 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
'~ 
~ 
A the election can be challenged not only by any candidate 
of such election but also even an elector who was 
,. 
entitled to vote at the election to which the election 
petition relates irrespective of the fact that whether he 
has voted at such election or not. Sub-section (3) 
8 mandates that depending on the number of respondents 
mentioned in the petition, such required copies duly 
attested by the election petitioner under his ow.n 
signature to be a true copy of the petition shall be 
furnished. [Paras 7 and 8] [252-A-D] 
c 
1.2. A close look of Section 81 reveals that the two 
remaining Sub-sections after the amendment introduced 
by Act 47 of 1966, i.e. (1) and (3) deal with two distinct, 
but inter-related issues. Sub-section (1) deals with the 
D 
necessary requirements of any petition challenging an 
election, and Sub-section (3) deals with additional 
requirements as to the petition presented. Sub-section (1) 
has five components, (i) the qualification of the petitioner, 
i.e. he/she must be either "a candidate at such election" 
or an "elector"; (ii) the petition must be presented 'by' the 
E petitioner; (iii) the petition must be based "on one or more 
of the grounds specified in sub-section (1) of section 100 
and section 101; (iv) it must be presented in the High 
Court; and (v) it must be presented within 45 days from, 
t-
but not earlier than the date of election of the returned 
F candidate, or if there are more than one returned 
candidate at the election and dates of their election are 
different, the later of those two dates. Therefore, all these 
five requirements are extremely specific and clear. This 
inference is further strengthened by Section 86(1) which 
G provides that the "High Court shall dismiss an election 
petition which does not comply with the provisions of 
Section 81". [Paras 10 to 12] [253-C-F] 
...... 
K. Venkateswara Rao and Anr. v. Bekkam Narasimha 
H Reddi and Ors. (1969) 1 SCR 679; Hukumdev Narain Yadav 
I 
G.V. SREERAMA REDDY AND ANR. v. RETURNING 247 
OFFICER AND ORS. 
v. La/it Narain Mishra (1.974) 2 SCC 133, referred to. 
A 
2. While interpreting a special statute, which is a self-
contained code, the Court must consider the intention of 
the legislature. The reason for this fidelity towards the 
legislative intent is that the statute has been enacted with 
B 
a specific purpose which must be measured from the 
wording of the statute strictly construed. The preamble 
.j( 
of the Representation of the People Act makes it clear that 
for the conduct of elections of the Houses of Parliament 
or the Legislature of each State, the qualification and dis- c 
qualification for membership of those Houses, the 
corrupt practice and other offences in connection with 
such allegations the Act was enacted by the Parliament. 
In spite of existence of adequate provisions in the Code 
1 
of Civil Procedure relating to institution of a suit

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.