LexKABUL SINGH versus KUNDAN SINGH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
.. A B D E 845 KABUL SINGH v. KUNDAN SINGH & ORS. August 13, 1969 [K. S. HEGDE AND A. N. RAY, JJ.] Representation of the People Acl, 1951-Elections-Section 23 sub-s. (3 )-Inclusion of natne in electoral roll after last date for filing no1nina- tion-Section 23(3)i/ mandatory-Electoral roll, finality of-Recrimina- tory petition, nature of. In the elections to the Punjab Legislative Council from the local a\":'.:1orities constituency· the appellant who \\.:as declared elected secured one vote more than the first respondent. The first respondent challenged the election of the appellant on t:1e ground that the vote of H should have been held to be void aS his nan1e was included in the electoral roll after the last date for the ftling of nomination in defiance of the proVisions of s. 23(3) of the Act. To this the appellant filed a recriminatory petition contending that .the votes, df two other persons B and S also were void as their names were included in the electoral roll after the last date for fil- ing nominations. He. also alleged that the vote of another voter T was void as he had become a government servant by the time the polling took place and therefore was disqualified ,to be a member of any local board. The High Court came to. the conclusion that the votes of H. B· and S were void and counting the valiQity cast votes declared the first respondent elected. But when on scrutiny it was found· that of B and S one of them had actua1Iy cast his first preference to the appellant he contended that as the first respondent had not challenged the validity of those votes the trial court could not have· excluded from consideration the vote cast in his favour by orie of those persons. HELD : Section 23 (3) takes away the power of the electoral registra- tion officer or the chief electoral officer to correct the entries in the elec- toral ro11s or to include ne~ names in the electoral rolls of a constituency after the last date for making the nominations 1for election in that constl- tuency. It prohibits inclusion of any name in the electoral roll after the F pn1:scribed date whether the application for inclusion was made before or after that date. [848 Gl G H Baidyanath Panjiar v. Sita Ram Malito. [1970] I S.C.R. 839, followed. (ii) The election petition and the recriminatory petition are parts of one enquiry. As the validity df the three votes had come up for consi- deration and as it was held that those votes were void it necessarily follow- ed that the votes had to be excluded in determining the result of the election. The fact that the first respondent did not challenge the validity of those votes was immaterial in the circumstances of the case. [848 D] (iii) There is no provision in the Act which disqualified T from. vot- ing and the question whether a particular vote was a valid vote or not has to be decided solely on the basis of the provisions of the Act. Jn view of s. 30 df the 1950 Act the entries found in the electoral roll are final and civil .courts have no jurisdiction to entertain or adjudicate upon any question whether .any person is or is not entitled to register himself in the electoral roll. [850 El 84€ SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1970] I S.CR. B. M. Ramamamy v. B. M. Krishnamurthy, [1963) 3 S.C.R. 479, referred to. C1v1L APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1359 of 1969. Appeal under s. 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 from the judgment and order dated March 20, 1969 of the 8 Punjab and Haryana High Court in Election Petition No. 1 of 1968. Hardev Singh, for the appellant. R. K. Garg. S. C. Agarwala, D. P. Singh and Sumitra Chakra- varti for respondent No. 1. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde, J. This appeal under s. l l 6A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (to be shortly referred to hereinafter as the Act) is directed against the decision of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Election Petition No. 1 of 1968 on its file. In that election petition, Kundan Singh, the I st respondent to this appeal challenged the validity of the returning officer's declaration that the appellant has been duly elected from the Hoshiarpur Local Authorities Constituency to the Punjab Legislative Council in the election held in April, 1968. The High Court caine to the CQn- clusion that some of the votes polled in that election were invalid votes and if the valid votes alone are taken into considera
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.