NUSUM KASI REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Election Authority dated 12th January, 1960 directing fresh election of the President of the Village Panchayat of Potlapadu, Nellore District. Elections to that panchayat took place on nth September, 1959. The date fixed for the election of the President thereof was 29th September, 1959 and the Block Development Extension Officer was appointed to conduct that election. The petitioner and the 3rd respondent contested for the presidentship. We have conflicting versions as to what happened at that meeting. According to the petitioner, he polled six votes and his rival candidate four votes, that he was declared elected as President of that panchayat and that the persons present there affixed their signatures in token of its correctness. On the other hand, the 3rd respondent has it that he secured six votes as against four obtained by the petitioner, that immediately the Returning Officer declared him to be the successful candidate but later on, the Returning Officer, in collusion with the unsuccessful candidate, manipulated the records to show that the petitioner was the successful candidate and that when he came to know of it he made representations to the District Panchayat Officer, Nellore, who made an enquiry on the 14th or 15th October, 1959. Whichever story is a true one, the enquiry held by the District Panchayat Officer resulted in the suspension of the Officer who conducted the election of the President. On the 15th, the majority of the members of that panchayat met again and elected the 3rd respondent as the President of that panchayat.

(2.) Subsequently, the Inspector-General of Local Administration, under rule 14 of the Rules relating to the decision of election disputes, issued a notice to the petitioner, dated 15th December, 1959, calling upon him to show cause why there should not be a fresh election for the reason that both himself and Govinda Reddy were claiming to have been duly elected as the President of that panchayat and that rule 6 of the rules relating to election of President and Vice-President was infringed in that the candidates took part in the ballot.

(3.) The petitioner controverted that Govinda Reddy had obtained a majority of votes and asserted that rule 14 of the rules for decision of election disputes was unconstitutional and hence the proceedings initiated thereunder were of no effect. Overruling these objections, the Inspector-General passed the order which is now questioned before us.