-27 T§~I' E_«RETURNING OFFICER
IMDIKERI TALUK, COORG.
(I3y SMT: M c NAGASHREE, AGA FOR R2) (
at THE men comm' or é " x
mama THIS TI-IE 9th nA1?».:9F§'_'J£i1§E.f2;O§}éI "
um xzozrnuz ma. _vA1§3'7.BDY
wnrr 1=E*rI'rmx £138-ELE)
sMrKKBAN1.3'--... - _
D/C) LATE KUNHI RAM'Ar«:.. , .
AGE} 42 YEARS " ,?
R/O KADA< POST
MADIKERI11*ALm{,"c':Q<)RG.'«.._ -- '
. . . PETITIONER
(By an: K M r§m'rARA;j,-_A:),V'«..%'L~~)
1 R.V'B.HPsGIR£iTHY
'AGED 3'1f;'¥13:2aRs
W50 LA'I'E' jRAJU
L we KADAGADALU VILLAGE AND POST
MADIKERI TALUK, COORG.
"»KADAGADALU GRAM PANCHAYATH ELECTION
RESPONDENTS
‘Bharathiya Hindu Malayan’ and that the words Tiya’
was erased in the extract Ex.C-1 (a). Ex.C-2(a)
to be another sehooi record, as testified ”
is that the caste of the declared
as ‘Bharathjya Hindu Nayar-M:§leiVyda’ii.f
examination admits that _fl1e ‘de’e.1.ared
belongs to ‘Bharathiya Nayér}_M3iay$ilj’ as
recorded in the e_ :4._a¥1:c£e.t11eVVe.diVi1ission
regster.
I The of PW-2 the Disirict
Officer, B:-iekvgv-a_t11–. testjfies that the caste
is.’ the other backward
the caste ‘Nayar’ does not fall under
community and noxmafly in the case of
woman, the caste to which father
would be considered as the caste to which
belongs. So aiso PW-3, the Tahsildar who issued
‘ the caste certificate Ex”?-8 deposed that he did not
H
“Harijan’, No clinching evidence was adduced to
establish that the petitioner E H’ .. V
‘He1eya(Harijana)’ caste. in fact, Ex.R–2
issued by the School arid l
the Transfer Certificate {meal
candidate belong to ‘I~IiI1du–‘M§ii.ayali.”-~ Tillie
spoken to by CW1, rise iilviéidegadalu
Higher Prim’ my School-esilwefl and R-3
the and the certified
copy “clearly disclose that the
petitioner ‘iliindu Malayali.’ No exception
. i Etiéikegeto tliewiiildings, reasons and conclusions
– Election Tribunal.
9.. There is considerable force in the submission
of lithe learned counsel for the petitioner that the
A’ Election Tribunal fell in error in declaring’ the election
petitioner as duly elected from the Closebem
bi
IE
Reserved Constituency to Kadagadaiiijid H
Panchayath, Kodagu District.
10. Section 20 of tlde Act {he
purpose reads thus: ‘ V d ‘
“Grounds on whicflh a than
the to have
been elt3’_¢21.f:i’d’ i’ Qerfiofi filed an
election: djédditzviévaxi to calling in
qugtétiiiii’ thé’._'”x*é1firned candidate,
C}a.{II1S”‘a’ ih§t*–hc “himself or any other
canddidafcdd has. Vb”edén,_4d1§ljrV.’.elccted and the (Civil
.3_–.:dge (.ii:a;m- Biviéidiij) is ofopi11ion~
–. fact the petitioner or such other
1 vv.:v4:”‘¢v.§uidid:ate received a majority of the
_ votes; or
but for {he votes obtained by the
V = returned candidate by corrupt practices
the psetitioner or such other candtdatt
would have obtained a majority of the
valid votes;
the (Civil Judge(.Junior. E)v11)) shall after
declaring the elecfion of the returned candidate
to be void declare the: petitiimer or such other
candidate, as the case may be, to have bu
elected.
(:2) The decision the V’ .
Judge[Junior.Dvn))s}:1all A V
H. Sec.10} ‘-the of Peoples
Act, 1951 read t.nue:oo__f_eeeV ‘ b
other
than the ;?t-gtiifiied4’Cé§nEii:{ate’v.;11ay be declared
to’ ‘h;«;iire–
has lodged a petition
nee,’ – additioi: . ealling in question the
electionu” the’ retufrxed candidate, claimed a
._i iie(;let1e1ion he himself or any other
% _Vcan:dé{ia§e’~–.bas been duly elected and the High
.143 rji”-.c§pi11_1o:1 —
(ej fact the petitioner or such other
..ee,n;::ie1ate received a majority of the vaiid
Votes; or
H (b) that but for the votes obtained by the
returned candidate by corrupt practice the
petitioner or such other candidate would
have obtained a majority of the valid votes,
the High Court shall, after declaring the election
of the returned candidate to be void declare the
M
yefifioncr or such other candidate, as th-.§fbasg§”” ‘~
may be, to have been duly electcgi
:2. Section 20 of the Act is’%%%pa§¥a *
that of Sec. 101 of the Repfe.§€:ntatfion._§f Act,
1951 and tI1ereforey’the by the
Courts under Sec. 101’-‘ of
Peoples Act 1;o:=_Se::.
1»3;~~- “””Vv.’E\’ii:ddy vs. Konappa
Rudrapvpa ” ‘ §I.1other, reported in AIR
1969 SC ._ Ape)?’ Court having regard to the
Qf sec; v}–£1}«’of the Representation of Peoples
. V ‘ A ~
_ ‘A . Zglfhen there are only two contesting
V .4 cgޤ1id:$;tes, and one of them is under a
AA , statfitory disqualification, Votes cast in
% = favour of the disqualified candidates may be
regarded as thrown away, irrespective of
whether the voters who voted for him were
aware of the disquaiificatien and no fresh
poll is necessary. This is not to say that
M
In the result, the Writ petition is allowed ” ~ V.
The order impugned in so far as .i__t
the 131: respondent election
the membership of thg ..«–VV:P§%ncif1ayath
from the Closebemv ‘4″”~V%”é”\\”*17,”$”tituez1C3/, is
quashed.
csg