SARDAR GURMEJ SINGH versus SARDAR PARTAP SINGH KAIRON

Citation: [1960] 1 S.C.R. 909 · Decided: 30-09-1959 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUDHI RANJAN DAS · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
SARDAR GURMEJ SINGH 
'II. 
SARDAR PARTAP SINGH KAIRON 
(S. R. DAS, C.J., S. K. DAS, A. K. SARKAR, 
K. SuBBA RAO and M. HIDAYATULLAH, JJ.) 
909 
Election Petition-Appointment of Lambardar as polling and 
counting agent-Whether amounts to corrupt practice-Lambardar, 
if a village accountant-Representation of the People Act, r95r (43 
of I95I), S. I2J (7)(f). 
The respondent was declared elected to the Punjab Legisla-
tive Assembly from the Sarhali constituency. The appellant who 
was one of the contesting candidates, filed an election petition 
for a declaration that the election of the respondent was void 
inter alia on the ·ground that he had appointed a number of 
lambardars as his polling and counting agents and had thus 
committed a corrupt practice mentioned in s. 123(7) of the 
Representation of the People Act, 195r. The appellant contended 
that lambardars were both revenue officers and village account-
ants within the meaning of cl. (f) of s. 123(7). 
Held, that lambardars were not persons falling within cl. (f) 
of s. 123(7) of the Act and a<;cordingly the respondent had not 
committed any corrupt practice in appointing lambardars as his 
polling and counting agents. Clause (£) of s. 123(7) referred to 
revenue officers including village accountants such as patwaris, 
lekhpals, karnams and the like but excluding other village officers. 
The genus is the "revenue officers'', and the "including" and 
"excluding" clauses connected by the conjunction "but" show 
that the village accountants were included in the group of revenue 
officers, but the other village officers were excluded therefrom. 
Lambardars, being village revenue officers, were excluded from 
the operation of cl. (f) of s. 123(7) of the Act.. Further, Iambar-
dars were not village accountants and did not fall within the 
inclusive part of cl. (f). 
Raja Bahadur K. C. Deo Bhanj v. Raghunath Misra, 19 E.L.R. 
I, distinguished. 
C1vn, APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appea.l No. 
324 of l95!J. 
Appeal by srwcial leave from the judgment and 
order dated the l2Lh March, 195!), of the Punjab High 
Court, in Civil Writ No. 170 of 1959. 
N. 0. Chatterjee and Janardan Sharma, for the appel-
lant. 
115 
x959 
I959 
Sardar Gur1"ej 
Singh 
v. 
Sardar Partap 
Singh Kairon 
Subba Rao j. 
910 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1960(1)] 
G. 8. Pathak, H. 8. Doabia, Additional Advocate-
General, for the State of Punjab, Gopal Singh and P. 8. 
Safeer, for the respondent. 
1959. September 30. The Judgment of the Court 
was delivered by 
SUBBA RAO J.-This appeal by special leave raises 
the question of true construction of the provisions of 
s. 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 
1951 (hereinafter called "the Act"). The material 
facts may be briefly stated : Sardar Gurmej Singh, 
the appellant, Sardar Partap Singh Kairon, the 
present Chief Minister of the State of Punjab and 
respondent herein, and others were the contesting 
candidates in the general election held in ·February 
1957, from the Sarhali constituency. The respondent 
secured the highest number of votes and was duly 
declared elected to the Punjab Legislative Assembly. 
On April II, 1957, the appellant filed an election 
petition (Election Petition No. 22 of 1957) 
for 
the declaration that the election of the respondent 
was void under s. 100 of the·Act. It was, inter alia, 
alleged by him that the respondent and his election 
agent had appointed a number of persons as the res-
pondent's counting and polling agents at different 
centres and that the said persons were, at the material 
time, working as lambardars, and, therefore, the res-
pondent was guilty of corrupt practice within the 
ll\llaning of s. 123 of the Act. The respondent denied 
the material allegations made in the petition. On the 
pleadings as many as 12 issues were framed, and 
issues 3 a!ld 8 were taken up for trial as preliminary 
issues. 
Issue 8, which is the only relevant issue for 
the present enquiry, reads; 
" Is Lam bardar 8. person in the service of Govern-
ment or is it covered by any of the clauses of 
section 123(7) of the Representation of the People 
Act, 1951 ? " 
The Election Tribunal held against the respondent on 
both the preliminary issues. On issue 8 it held that a. 
lambardar was a revenue officer and village account-
ant in the service of Government within the meaning 
of cl. (f) of sub-s. (7) of s. 123 of the Act. On the ha.sis 
.... 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
911 
of the find

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