VIDYASAGAR BHAGWANRAO SAKHARE Vs. SHIVAJIRAO VITHALRAO KAMBLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges the election of the respondent to the Parliamentary Constituency No. 36, Osmanabad. This Parliamentary Constituency in Maharashtra is reserved constituency for Scheduled Caste. The petitioner is Mahar by caste and he, therefore, contested the election. The respondent also contested the election and was declared elected. It is the contention of the petitioner, that the respondent belongs to Maratha caste but he obtained a false and bogus certificate regarding caste indicating that he belongs to Hindu Khatik community. The petitioner has contended that the respondent does not belong to Scheduled Caste and, therefore, he was not eligible to contest the election from the constituency reserved for Scheduled Caste. He has, therefore, prayed that the election of the respondent to the House of People from 36th Osmanabad (Scheduled Caste) Parliamentary constituency held on 2-5-1996, the result of which declared on 9-5-1996, be declared as null and void and be set aside.

(2.) THE respondent has filed Civil Application No. 16 of 1997 (Exhibit 8) and has raised various preliminary objections to this election petition. He has contended that the copy of Election Petition furnished to the respondent contains a statement which is titled as affidavit vide page 68 and at page 17 and 18 which is titled as verification. The respondent has contended that the copy furnished to the respondent does not indicate whether verification was done and, if so, before whom it was done. So, the copy is not the true copy of the petition. It is also contended that the copy furnished to the respondent does not bear the endorsement of the presentation of Election Petition and, therefore, it is not true copy because the respondent cannot ascertain whether the presentation of the petition was proper and as per the mandatory provision of the law.

(3.) IT is also contended that the copy which is supplied to the respondent indicates that it was verified on 25th day of June 1996 i. e. 46th day from the date of result of election and from this point of view also, the copy supplied to the respondent is not true copy. Furthermore, the verification of the copy of 25th June, 1996 clearly indicates that the Election Petition is filed beyond period of limitation.