MOHAMMAD USMANUL HAQ Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR SADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant case the impugned order dated 8-1-2002 is without jurisdiction because the electoral Officer has in a way permitted use of Form 8 even when the objection in an existing entry in the electoral roll has been made by a third person and not by the petitioner.

(2.) Rule 13 (3) of the Registration of Electorals Rules, 1960 framed under the Representation of People Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred as the 'Rules' and the 'Act' respectively) do not permit the type of decision which has been passed inasmuch as the petitioner never objected to the entry which was existing in the Electoral Roll.

(3.) Since inherent lack of jurisdiction emanates from the impugned order, no appeal lay and even if it is held by this Court that appeal lies, on the facts and circumstances of the case, said alternative remedy be not imposed as a bar to the petitioner. Petitioner is approaching this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directly for there is every likelihood that notice for election may be published in one or two days with the result that the petitioner will now, in view of the impugned order, stand debarred from contesting the same.