ABDUL JABBAR Vs. SYEDA ANWARA TAIMUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the last general election of the State Legislative Assembly of Assam held in 1983, the Petitioner and the Respondents 1 and 2 contested as candidates from Dalgaon Legislative Constituency. The Respondent 1 secured 15605 Votes, the Petitioner secured 14051 and the Respondent 2 secured 3443 votes. As such, the respondent I was duly declared elected to the Assam Legislative Assembly from Dalgaon Constituency on 22nd February 1983. The Petitioner has challenged the election of the Respondent 1 on various grounds in this Court.

(2.) THE notice of the election petition has been served on each of the Respondents and the Respondent 1 Syeda Anwar Taimur, has filed an application dated 16th June, 1983 for dismissal of the petition under Section 86(1) of the Representation of People Act, 1951(the Act, for short) stating that the election petition was not presented in the manner and method prescribed for the presentation of an election petition under Sections 80, 80A and 81 of the Act and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 that the Rule -1 of Chapter VIII -A of the Rules of the Gauhati High Court, which provides that an election petition may be presented to the Stamp Reporter of the High Court, is violative of Sections 80, 80A and 81 of the Act and Rule 1 of Chapter VIII -A of the Gauhati High Court Rules is arbitrary, illegal and null and void, that the election petition was not presented or filed by the Petitioner in person, or by his recognised agent or by his counsel; that on 8th April, 1983, a Bandh for 7 (seven) hours was called in the State of Assam and on 8th April, 1983 the functioning of the High Court was affected by the said Bandh call as except for a few Hon'ble Judges, no office employee of the High Court could attend his duties in the sections and the Filing Section was closed after the door was initially opened for about an hour or so in the morning; that on 8th April, 1983, due to the said Bandh call the Stamp Reporter -cum -Commissioner of Oaths did not attend work and in fact he did not sign the Daily Attendance Register along with other assistants in his section. It is also stated that the filing register shows that no filing was recorded on 8th April, 1983 and although the records of the present election petition shows that the affidavit of the election Petitioner was sworn and he was identified on 8th April, 1983 at 1 P.M.; and it bears the seal of the High Court dt. 8th April 1983 but this position is not correct in view of the fact stated above, the Respondent 1 has further stated that the Filing Section remained closed at the relevant time, namely at 1 P.M. on 8th April, 1933 and the report of the Stamp Reporter was made on 11 April, 1983 but the filing register records the filing of the election petition only as on 13th April 1983, vide tender No. 2361/39 and the filing register does not show that the election petition was presented on 8th April 1983 and therefore the election petition is barred by limitation under Section 81 of the Act.

(3.) RE : Issues 1, 2 and 3: