OMPRAKASH ROTTE Vs. CENTRAL ELECTION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed challenging the notification of election dated 13.10.2021 issued by respondent No.1 for conducting election to the third respondent-Society and also with a prayer to direct the respondent No.2 to reject nomination of fourth respondent. Election to the third respondent-Society is sought to be set-aside on the ground that the Returning Officer has to be a person holding a position of not less than the rank of Assistant Commissioner and in the instant case a Tahasildar is appointed as Returning Officer and the prayer to reject the nomination of fourth respondent is made on the ground that he is the immediate past President and as per regulation, he cannot contest for the post of President, once again.

(2.) The bye-laws of third respondent-Society states that society should request the Government for appointment of a person not less than the rank of Assistant Commissioner as the Returning Officer. The respondent No.3-Society is not a State Government of Karnataka undertaking and it is not an Agency or an instrumentality of the State to be considered as a State for the purpose of Article 12 of Constitution of India and regulations of the Society are made by the Members of the Society and does not have the sanctity of a law for the purpose of Article 13 of the Constitution of India. It is a contract between the Members only.

(3.) However, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.2 submits that at the request of the Society a person in the rank of Assistant Commissioner has been appointed as Returning Officer.