DEOCHANDRA JHA Vs. RAMCHANDRA MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Deochandra Jba was one of the foul-candidates who contested the election to the Bihar Legislative Assembly from Jhanjharpur constituency in the district of Darbhanga for which election was held in the months of January to Match, 1957. One of the four candidates Deonandan Jha, retired from the contest on the 4th of February, 1957, and only three candidates were left in the field, one of whom was the petitioner, Ramchandra Mishra. The appellant, Deochandra Jha was declared elected at the counting of votes on the 25th March, 1957, as having secured the largest number of votes. Ramchandra Mishra filed an election petition challenging the validity of the election under Clauses (d) and (e) of Section 7 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The main allegations against him, were that he held several contracts with the Government of Bihar for the execution of works which were still subsisting when scrutiny of the nomination papers was made. He was also a proprietor of a firm Basant Lal Deochandra Jha which also held an office of profit under the Government through the Grow More Food Department as stockists and distributors of cement at Rajnagar. There was a contract for the construction of a portion of the Kamla Balan Embankment at village Bali Mehath dated the 8th of February, 1956. The petitioner also alleged several corrupt practices having been resorted to by the appellant in course of the election in the form of carrying voters of different villages to different booths in his own tractor with trailer and bullock cart. He also procured jeep tire cart etc., for carrying the voters from their homes to the polling booths all of which were specified in detail in the election petition. There were other allegations as well of corrupt practices, but it is unnecessary to set out inasmuch, as they have not been found to have been substantiated by the Election Tribunal and they have not been pressed before us by the learn- ed Counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The appellant admitted to be the proprietor of the firm Basant Lal Deochandra Jha. According to him, this firm has two kinds of business, one of which was to act as stockists of food grains, and the other to act as stockists of cement. He had interest in the grain business but not in the cement business which was the sole concern of Basant Lal Kejriwal. He also alleged that although he had connection with the grain business at one time, he ceased to have any concern with that before the filing and scrutiny of his nornina- tion paper. As to the Kamla Balan Embankment, it was alleged that the contract was only for three months and the work was completed before the outbreak of rains in 1956, and it was not subsisting at the time of the filing of the nomination papers. This particular contract was entered into by him not in his personal capacity for any pecuniary benefit for himself but that the contract was entered into with the Government by the Mahath Gram Pan- chayat of which he happened to be Mukhia at the time of the execution of the agreement. He had no concern with this work after the election of the new Mukhia in May 1956 when he made over charge to him and handed over the papers in connection with this contract to the Gram Sewak, Sukhdeo Yadav. Other allegations in the plaint with regard to contract and corrupt practices were also denied.

(3.) The Election Tribunal of Darbhanga has accepted the case of the appellant on all matters except with regard to the appellant's interest in the firm Basant Lal Deochandra Jha acting as stockists of foodgrain as also stockists and distributors of cement. According to the Tribunal, the candidature of the appellant was vitiated under Section 7(d) as it stood before its amendment inasmuch as he must be held in the circumstances to have interest in the contract for the execution of any work or performance of any service or per-formance of any services undertaken by, the Government of Bihar. The respondent, Ramchandra Mishra, has preferred a cross-objection to the finding of the Tribunal to the effect that the appellant entered into contract with the Government of Bihar in regard to the Kamla Balan Embankment as the Mukhia of the Mahath Gram Pan* chayat, and further that that interest also ceased after the election of the new Mukhia which took place in 1956 before the appellant filed his nomination paper for election as a member of the Bihar Legislative Assembly.