ABDUL RAHMAN Vs. NUTAN RAJWADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Taking exception to the judgment and order of the learned District Judge, Korba acting as Election Tribunal constituted under Section 441 of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act of 1956'), this civil revision under Section 441-F(2) of the Act of 1956 has been preferred branding the said order as unsustainable and contrary to law, whereby the learned Tribunal has set aside the election of the petitioner on the post of Councillor, Ward No.23 of Municipal Corporation, Korba.

(2.) The election of Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Korba and Councillors of all the wards of Municipal Corporation, Korba including Ward No.23 was held on 29-12-2014 and result was declared on 4-1-2015. The petitioner and respondents No.1 to 4 contested election for the post of Councillor of the said ward No.23 which was reserved for Other Backward Classes (OBC). The petitioner was declared elected as Councillor on 4-1-2015 against the seat reserved for OBC. The election petitioner / respondent No.1 herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the election petitioner') filed election petition under Section 441-F of the Act of 1956 questioning the election of the petitioner mainly on the ground that on the date of filing nomination paper, Sessions Trial No.46/2009 for offence punishable under Sections 147, 307 read with Section 34, 294 and 506 Part-II of the IPC were registered and charges were framed against the petitioner and the case was fixed for evidence and that charge-sheet was filed pursuant to the offence registered under Crime No.1077/2008 at Police Station Kotwali, Korba in which most of the offences are punishable with imprisonment for two years or more, and the petitioner / returned candidate did not disclose the pendency of said criminal case in his nomination paper and thereby his election is liable to be declared void. It was also pleaded that the petitioner filed his provisional caste certificate issued in Revenue Case No.7052/B-121/2013-14, but when he obtained certified copy from the Office of the Tahsildar, it was revealed that no such caste certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner against the said revenue case number, but domicile certificate and income certificate had been issued at the instance of one Abdul Rafique Khan of his daughter, as such, the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner is forged and he was not qualified and entitled to contest the election of the said Ward No.23 of Municipal Corporation, Korba, as such, his election may be declared void.

(3.) The petitioner herein filed his reply before the Election Tribunal and opposed the prayer made in the election petition and stated that the caste certificate issued by the competent authority / Tahsildar which has not been questioned has attained finality and that offence was registered prior to six months from the date of filing of nomination, therefore, the petitioner was not required to disclose the pendency of said criminal case while filing the nomination paper. The Election Tribunal made enquiry on the election petition and thereafter, by the impugned judgment declared the election of the petitioner void on the ground that the petitioner failed to disclose the pendency of criminal case in which charges had already been framed at the time of his nomination paper and secondly, that his caste certificate was not issued by the competent officer and therefore the petitioner does not belong to OBC, as such, his election on the reserved post of Councillor of Municipal Corporation, Korba is void and declared the post to be vacant against which this civil revision has been preferred under the above-stated provisions of the Act of 1956.