K MARUTHI Vs. K DASAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution primarily on the basis of the principle that the impugned Endorsement dated 23-9-1986 is vitiated by an error of law apparent on the face of the record.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved since his nomination paper presented on 21-9-1986 to contest for one of the seats in the "large farmers and others constituency" was rejected by the Returning Officer not because the nomination paper was defective or invalid, but because the notice of intention to contest in the election was defective.

(3.) The only point to be considered is whether penalty an error of law has been committed by the Returning Officer by misconstruing the relevant provision of law and by consequent misapplication of the law.