SHYAM SUNDAR GUPTA Vs. DEOKINANDAN PDDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this election petition, Shyam Sundar Gupta, the election petitioner has challenged the election on May 20, 1982 , of the respondent No. 1, Deoki Nandan Poddar, as the returned candidate from 143, Jorasanko Assembly Constituency in the State of West Bengal. The grounds of challenge, mainly, are that the respondent No. 1 is not an elector of 143, Jorasanko Assembly Constituency, that he was not on the date of the said election field on 19th May 1 982 or at all an elector for 157, Vidyasagar Assembly Constituency and that the entry at serial No. 661 Part No. 92 of 157 Vidyasagar Constituency did not relate to the respondent no. 1 and the elector mentioned in the said entry and the respondent No. 1 are different persons. Accordingly the respondent No. 1 is not qualified to fill a seat in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly from 143, Jorasanko Constituency and the nomination papers filed by the Respondent No. 1 are invalid. Therefore the election of the Respondent No. 1 is void.

(2.) 'the allegation made in the petition are that on 2 6th April 19 82 during the scrutiny of the nomination paper of the candidates for the said Constituency for election held on May 19, 1 982, it appeared that the respondent no. 1 purported to describe himself in his nomination paper as an elector of 157, Vidyasagar Assembly Constituency in the State of West Bengal, and his name was allegedly registered as elector in Part No. 92, Serial No. 66 1, of the Electoral Roll of 157, Vidyasagar Assembly Constituency. It is further alleged that at the time of the said scrutiny it appeared that the respondent No. 1 had purported to filed along with the nomination papers a certified copy of the entry in the Electoral Roll for 1982 Vidyasagar Assembly Constituency, which reads as follows :

(3.) THE election petitioner objected to the consideration of the said nomination papers of the respondent No. 1 at the time of scrutiny of the same as the respondent No. 1 was not an elector for any Assembly Constituency in the State of West Bengal and as such he was not qualified to be chosen to fill seat in the Legislative Assembly. The entry in the Electoral Roll of 157 Vidyasagar Assembly Constituency, the certified copy whereof has been purported to be filed by the respondent no. 1 along with his nomination papers, did not and could not relate to the respondent No. 1 who was neither an ordinary resident nor a resident of No. 116/1/1, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Calcutta, nor he is the son of Guru Pratap Poddar, nor aged 50 years as on January 1, 1981, as indicated in the said certified copy. It was, therefore, contended before the Returning Officer that the respondent No. 1 was not" an elector within the meaning of Section 5 of the representation of the Peoples Act, 1951.