DURGA SINGH Vs. M LAKSHMAN YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 25-11-2002 made in I.A.No.3365/2002 in O.P.No.681/ 2002 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in allowing the application of the respondent filed under Order VI Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure to amend the main petition by adding Para 7(a) after Para 7.

(2.) The respondent herein is the Election Petitioner in the said O.P. No.681/ 2002. The petitioner herein is the 1st respondent in the said O.P. and elected candidate as member of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad from Kachiguda Ward No. 13. For the sake of convenience, the petitioner hereinafter referred to as the 'Election Petitioner' and the 1st respondent hereinafter referred to as the 'Returned Candidate'. The 1st respondent filed the said election petition before the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad: Election Tribunal under Sections 71 to 75 .of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Act to try the election petition. The Election Petition is filed under Sections 71, 74, 77, 78, 79 and 80 of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Act mainly on the grounds of improper receipt of votes in the election and counting irregularities. The Election Petitioner also alleged that the Returned Candidate has indulged in the corrupt practices. Section 79 deals with the grounds for declaration by Returned Candidate to be void. Section 79(1) deals with the bribery, undue influence, and group intimidation. Section 79(2) also deals with the corrupt and illegal practice. Under Section 79(2)(d), if a Returned Candidate incurs disqualification for the election as a member, his election can be declared as void. Disqualification for registration in the electoral rolls are dealt under Section 10 and disqualification for voting are dealt under Section 20 and disqualification for being elected as a member is dealt under Sections 21, 22 and 23. Admittedly, the Returned Candidate did not incur any disqualification. If there is any disqualification, authorities are empowered to decide the question of disqualification of the members under Section 23 (d). The Returned Candidate filed his nomination, which was scrutinized under Section 39 and the final list of the contesting candidates was also published under Section 41. The seat in question is reserved for the Backward Class Community. There was no objection for the candidature of the Returned Candidate to contest for the said seat.

(3.) The election petition was filed in April, 2002. The Election Petitioner filed LA. No.3365/2002 under Order VI Rule 17 CPC in November, 2002 contending as follows: