LAWS(SC)-2003-12-91

AJAY KUMAR POEIA Vs. SHYAM

Decided On December 11, 2003
AJAY KUMAR POEIA Appellant
V/S
SHYAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Election Commission issued a Notification calling upon the electorates to elect the Members of the Legislative Assembly in the State of U.P. The date of Notification of election was 16th January, 2002 and the last date for filing nomination papers was 23rd January, 2002. The last date for withdrawal of nomination was 28th January, 2002. The date of poll was 21st February, 2002. In the said election, the appellant herein and respondent No. 1 were the contesting candidates. As a result of counting of votes, respondent No. 1 was declared elected as having received the majority of valid votes. The appellant herein filed a petition questioning the election of respondent No. 1 as member of Legislative Assembly from 346 Govardhan (S.C.) Assembly Constituency. The election petition purported to be based on the ground that respondent No. 1 is not a member of Scheduled Caste. After the notices were issued by the High Court in the election petition, respondent No. 1 filed an application under Order 6, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for striking off the grounds (i) to (v) and paragraphs 5-29 of elections petition on the ground that those paragraphs did not contain material facts as required under Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short 'the Act'). The High Court was of the view that since no fact warranting declaring the election of the respondent herein void had been alleged and the documents referred to therein having not been supplied, the same does not satisfy the requirement of Section81 of the Act. Since the election of respondent No. 1 was not challenged on any other ground, the High Court dismissed the petition. It is in this way, the appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 116-A of the Act, challenging the judgment of the High Court.

(2.) We have heard counsel for the parties.

(3.) The sole question which arises in this case is whether there was a pleading as regards the ground that respondent No. 1 is not a member of the Scheduled Caste. The relevant paragraphs to this effect runs as under :