(SHRI) SISODIA Vs. V. N. MAIDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filled in the nomination paper for the purpose of contesting the election as a Councillor for the General Election of Amreli Municipality which is scheduled to be held on 26th October 1986 from Ward No. 2. The petitioner's nomination paper was rejected by the Returning Officer under Rule 10(2) (iv) of the Gujarat Municipalities Rules, 1964 on the ground that he has erroneously mentioned 396 as his serial number in the voters' list instead of 629. At the time of scrutiny of nomination papers the petitioner submitted a written application to the Returning Officer, inter alia, stating that his correct serial No. is 629 and he may be permitted to correct the mistake but no such opportunity was given to the petitioner.

(2.) The learned advocate on behalf of the respondents submitted that as the petitioner has stated incorrect serial number the Returning Officer was justified in rejecting the nomination paper and that the Collector has rightly dismissed the appeal against the said order.

(3.) From the facts stated above it is clear that the petitioner's nomination paper was rejected solely on the ground that he has mentioned incorrect serial number in voters' list and this mistake cannot be said to be a substantial defect Rule 10 of the Gujarat Municipalities Election Rules, 1964 provides that after summary enquiry the Returning Officer can reject a nomination paper on the grounds mentioned therein. Rule 10(2) (iv) provides that the Returning Officer can reject a nomination paper if a candidate, proposer or seconder is not identical with the person whose electoral number is specified in the nomination paper as the number of such candidate, proposer or seconder, as the case may be. Now, this sub-rule is to be read with sub-rule (4)(i) which provides that the production of a certified copy of an entry made in the municipal election roll shall be conclusive evidence of the right of any voter named in that entry to stand for election or to subscribe a nomination paper, as the case may be, unless it is proved that the candidate or the proposer or the seconder is disqualified. In this case it is an admitted fact that the petitioner is not disqualified in any other manner.