MANOHAR LAL GOLE Vs. DILIP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issued of a writ of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 20. 12. 2007 (Annexure-P-1) passed by the divisional Commissioner (Revenue), the Election Tribunal under the Madhya pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 (for brevity 'the Act') whereby the said Election Tribunal has declined to deal with the election petition on merits on the ground that the election petition was not presented by the petitioner himself but through his counsel which was against the mandate of Rule 43 (6) of M. P. Krishi Upaj Mandi Rules, 1974 (for short 'the 1974 Rules' ).

(2.) THE facts which are imperative to be stated for the purpose of adjudication of the writ petition are that the election was held for the purpose of representative of agriculturist of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Sendhwa in which the petitioner and the respondents No. 2 to 6 were candidates. The respondent no,. 1 was elected and his election was notified on 18. 6. 2005. Being grieved, the petitioner preferred an election petition on 06. 7. 2005 under section 66-A of the act before the Election Tribunal questioning the election of the said respondent on many a ground. Before the Election Tribunal the respondents No. 1 and 8 filed their reply and raised an objection that the election petition deserves to be rejected on the ground that it was presented through his counsel but not by himself.

(3.) AN affidavit was filed by the petitioner stating, inter alia, that he was present with his counsel at the time of presentation of the election-petition. The said affidavit has been brought on record as Annexure-P-4.