DURBAN SAHEB Vs. YERRUPALEM GRAM PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the District Munsif, Madhira, sitting as an Election Court and disposing of O P. No. 2 of 1981. The present petitioner who contested and lost the election to the Sarpanch of Yerupalem has filed the aforesaid O P. No. 2 of 1981 challenging the declaration made by the Election Authority declaring the 3rd respondent, J.V. Krishna Rao, as having been duly elected as the Sarpanch of Yerupalem Gram Panchayat in the elections conducted on 29-5-81. That election petition filed by the present petitioner was dismissed by the election court, the District Munsif, Madhira.

(2.) Nominations for contesting the office of Sarpanch, Yerupalem were filed on 15-5-1981. The last date for scrutiny was fixed as 16-5-1981 and the date of withdrawal as 19-5-1981. It was alleged in the election petition that the Election Authority had illegally allowed the 3rd respondent, J.V. Krishna Rao, to contest the elections although he had withdrawn his "nomination and also withdrew the deposit amount of Rs. 50/- made by him." The question really is whether the third respondent withdrew his nomination. Although the election petitioner did not specifically mention the fact in his election petition that the above-mentioned third respondent hai filed two nomination papers it is admitted that the third respondent did in fact file two nominations and paid two separate deposits and has subsequently withdrawn one of those two nominations keeping anothei nomination in tact. On the above facts, the election court has framed the necessary issues and considered the documents marked by consent of the parties and dismissed the election petition n a rather summary and unsatisfactory way. It is against that judgment that the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) Two points have been urged by Sri Sivaramasastry, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. The first argument of Sri Siva ram a Sastry it that the third respondent, viz., the successful candidate Knshnarao, has filed two sets of nomination papers contrary to rule 4(3) of the A.P. Gram Panchayats (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 1978, hereinafter referred to as 'the election rules', promulgated by the Governor in G.O. Ms.No. 130 PR (Samithi) dated 2-2-78 and that, therefore, the presentation of the nomination papers by the third respondent itself is invalid. The second argument of Sri Sivarama Sastry is that the third respondent, having presented two sets of nomination papers, had withdrawn on 19 5-81 from the contest and that as ru e 10 (1) of the Election Rules permits only the withdrawal of the candidature of a contesting candidate as different from withdrawal of nomination the third respondent ought not to have been permitted to contest the election, and that, therefore, the Election Tribunal had acted illegally in not setting aside the election of the third respondent.