MOTI RAM versus PARAM DEV AND ANR.

Citation: [1993] 2 S.C.R. 250 · Decided: 05-03-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
MOTIRAM 
v. 
PARAM DEV AND ANR. 
MARCH 5, 1993 
B 
[S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN AND S.C. AGRAWAL. JJ.] 
Representation of tile Peoples Act, 1951 : Section 116- A-Election 
''r-
petition challenging applicant's election to the State Legislature Assembly-Al-
e lowed-Dissolution of the Legislation of the Legislative Assembly pending 
appeal to this court-Effect of. 
Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951-Section 36( 1)(2)-Require-
ment of the candidate of being qualified for being chosen to fill the seat on 
the date filed for scrutiny of nomination-Resignation from the office of 
D Chairman in far take effect from the date of the date of the communication 
for the Head of the Department in the Government. 
For election to the Himacbal Pradesh Legislative Assembly from 60-
Chachiot Assembly Constituency held during February, 1990, fifteen per-
sons, including the appellant and one Karam Singh, filed nomination 
E papers. At the time of scrutiny, an objection was raised against the 
nomination of Karam Singh on the ground that be was holding the office 
of Chairman, Himachal Pradesh Khadi and village Industries Board, 
which is an office of porfit within the meaning of Article 191(1)(a) of the 
Constitution and was, therefore, disqualified for being chosen as a m~mber 
F 
of the Legislative Assembly. The Returning Officer .upheld the objection 
and rejected the nomination of Karam Singh. The appellant was declared 
elected to the Legislative Assembly from the said Constituency. His elec-
tion was challenged by the Respondents by filing election petitions in the 
-
High Court of Himachal Pradesh. The High Court found that the said 
,......_ 
re1ection of nomination of Karam Singh was improper because on the date 
G of scrutiny Karam Singh was not holding an office of profit and for that 
reason, the election of the appellant was set aside. 
The appellant herein filed the present appeals nuder section 116-A 
of lhe Repn:sentation of the People Act, cliallenging the judgment of the 
H 
f;lg!J Court oi" Himachal Pradesh. 
250 
• 
-
MOT! RAM v. PARAM DEV 
251 
!luring the pendency of the appeals the Himachal Pradesh Legisla-
A 
tive Assembly was dissolved. 
After considering the appeals on merits the Court, which dismissing 
the appeals, 
HELD : 1. lnspite of the dissolution of the 'mmachal Pradesh B 
Legislative Assembly the question arising for consideration cannot be said 
to have become academic because the invalidation of the election of the 
appellant may give rise to the liability to refund the allowances received 
by the Appellant. [253G, 255-B] 
Loknath Padhan v. Birendra Kumar Sahu, [1974] 3 SCR 114, distin-
gnished. [253G] 
2.01. 'Resignation' means the spontaneous relinquishment of one's 
own right and in relation to an office, it cannotes the act of giving up or 
c 
relinquishing the office. The act of relinquishment may be unilateral or D 
bilateral depending on the return of the office and the conditions governing 
it. [260F] 
2.02. If the act of relinquishment is of unilateral character, it comes 
into effect when such act indicating the intention to relinquish the office 
is communicated to competent authority. The authority to whom the act E 
of relinquishment is commu~icated is not required to take any action and 
the relinquishment takes effect from the date of such communication 
where the resignation is intended to operate in praesemi. [260G] 
2.03. In cases where the act of relinquishment is of a bilateral 
character, the communication of the intention to relinquish, by itself, 
F 
would not be sufficient to result in relinquishment of the office and some 
.A 
action is required to be taken on such communication of the intention to 
relinquish, e.g., acceptance of the said request to relinquish the office, and 
in such a case the relinquishment does not become effective or operative 
.~· 
till such action is taken. [260ff,.261A-B] 
G 
~ .ot. From the provision of Section 7 of the H.P. Khadi and Village 
Industries Board Act, 1966, (the 'Act') it would appear that the act of 
relinquishment of the office of Chairman of the H.P. Khadi and Village 
Industries Board (the Board) is unilateral in character and the resignation 
from the said office takes effect when it is communicated without any H 
252 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1993] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
further action being required to be taken on the same. Sinre the Chairman 
of the Board is nominated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh under 
Section 4(2) of the Act,

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