SHIVPRASAD SHANTILAL RAVAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and order quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 27.02.2015 of the Authorized Officer/ Election Officer respondent no.3 declaring cancellation of the election of the agriculturists' constituency of APMA, Unjha.

(2.) That the election of the APMC, Unjha came to be declared by Election programme dated 06.12.2014 with respect to all the constituencies i.e. Agriculturists' Constituency, Traders' Constituency and Cooperative Marketing Constituency. That as per the said election programme the voting in the said election is scheduled to take place on 4.3.2005 and thereafter counting was to take place on 05.03.2015.

(3.) Shri B.B. Naik, learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that the impugned decision of respondent no.3 Election Officer to countermand poll in respect of agriculturists' constituency only is absolute illegal and contrary to Rule 24 of the Rules. It is submitted that as per Rule 24 of the Rules, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll as a whole with respect to all the constituencies i.e. countermand poll with respect to all the seats of the market committee, for which, elections are required to be held and the election proceedings with respect to all the constituencies are required to be commenced a new in all respects as if a new election. It is submitted that Rule 24 of the Rules does not provide that poll shall be countermand with respect to the constituency, for which, nominated candidates filled in the form and he died. It is submitted that it would be adding something which is not specifically provided / mentioned in the Rules. Shri Naik, learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that as per the cardinal principle of law, a provision is required to be read as it is and nothing is required to be added and / or substracted. It is submitted that therefore, when in the Rule it is mentioned that after taking of a poll has become necessary and before the poll is taken and it further provides that the candidate who has been duly nominated dies, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll it means countermand the poll as a whole i.e. with respect to all the constituencies i.e. general election as a whole with respect to all the constituency and is required commenced the election proceedings afresh and new in all respects as if for new election. It is submitted that as such under the law the election with respect to all the constituencies is required to be held at a time and the election is not held separately with respect to different constituencies. It is submitted that therefore, when the general election of the market committee is held with respect to all the constituencies, on the eventuality which occurs as provided in Rule 24, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll with respect to general election i.e. with respect to all the constituencies and is required to commence the election proceedings a new with respect to all the constituencies. It is submitted that if that not done and the polling is countermand only with respect to particular constituency, for which, the nominated candidates has died and election with respect to other constituencies is permitted to be held and or go on it may affect the result with respect to other constituency, for which, the election is held thereafter, for which the poll is countermand with respect to only one constituency.