RAMGOPAL Vs. ELECTION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by Ramgopal who was nominated as one of the candidates in the panchayat elections. His nomination -paper had been accepted on 21st April 1970. But on 24th April 1970 the proposer of the petitioner informed the Returning Officer that he did not want to continue as the proposer and that he may be permitted to withdraw. On the same day the Returning Officer passed an order that since the proposer wanted to withdraw from the nomination paper of the petitioner, the nomination paper was deemed to have been withdrawn. Since for that ward the petitioner was the only candidate whose nomination paper had been accepted, the result was that no person was elected from that ward. As a consequence of this, the Collector appointed respondent No. 3 Har Naryan under section 11 (7) of the M. P. Panchayats Act to fill the vacancy. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the Returning Officer dated 24th April 1970 holding that the nomination paper of the petitioner had been withdrawn.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised by Learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 that the matter should have been agitated in an election petition and not by way of a writ petition in this Court.

(3.) COMING to the merits, when the nomination paper of the petitioner had been accepted by the Returning Officer under rule 27 (6) of the M. P. Grampanchayat Election and Co -option Rules, the acceptance was final and he had no power thereafter to say that the acceptance was invalid. Under rule 23 a definite procedure for withdrawal is laid down where the candidate himself has to make an application for withdrawal. In the present case, no such application had been made and nomination paper cannot be held to be withdrawn merely on the request of the proposer. This was wholly illegal and without jurisdiction.