H.P.RAJESH Vs. S.V.RAMACHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed by the first respondent for dismissal of the Election Petition No.6/2018 on the ground that prayer sought for in the election petition has become infructuous, contending interalia that election petition has been filed only on the ground that first respondent does not belong to Nayaka-Scheduled Tribe and said issue which was under consideration by the District Caste Verification Committee, Davanagere (for short 'DCVC'), has now confirmed that first respondent belongs to Nayaka - Scheduled Tribe by order dated 19.08.2019 after conducting a detailed enquiry based on Civil Rights Enquiry (CRE) Cell report. It is also contended that in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of BHARATI REDDY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS reported in (2018) 6 SCC 162 prayer sought for in the election petition has become infructuous and does not survive for consideration and as such, election petition may be dismissed.

(2.) Objections to said application came to be filed by the Election Petitioner contending interalia that election petitioner is not a party to the proceedings before the DCVC and as such, order dated 19.08.2019 passed by the said committee would not have any bearing on the right of the petitioner to question the caste certificate of first respondent in an election petition or in other words, said order would not be binding on this Court or petitioner. It is also contended that no opportunity was afforded by the DCVC to the petitioner and as such, order passed by said authority would not be binding on the petitioner and his right to question the acceptance of 'nomination paper' filed by returned candidate i.e., first respondent still subsists to question the false caste certificate notwithstanding the order of DCVC and said right cannot be taken away by dismissing the election petition. He would also contend that order passed by the DCVC is inapplicable to the proceedings under the Representation of People Act, 1950 and as such, a full fledged trial will have to be held in this petition by adjudicating the election petition and prays for dismissal of I.A.No.2/2020.

(3.) I have heard the arguments of Sri G.R.Gurumath, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Smt.Akkamahadevi Hiremath for respondent No.1 - returned candidate and applicant in I.A.No.2/2020, Sri.Deepak.S.Shetty, learned Advocate appearing for election petitioner, Smt.S Susheela, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Smt.Dhanakakshmi Y for respondent No.9, Sri Pramod N Katavi, learned Advocate appearing for respondent No.10 and Sri D.S.Shivananda, learned Advocate appearing for respondents-2,4,6,7 & 11.