SOHANDAS Vs. SAMPATSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, Mr. M. Mridul, counsel for the petitioner, submits that Section 11 clause (g) and its proviso of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act has been wrongly interpreted by the Election Tribunal.

(2.) THE petitioner filed the election petition and the principal controversy was whether the conviction of the returned candidate would be counted from the date he was convicted by the Magistrate or the period for the purposes of part 2 of the proviso to Section 11 would be counted from the date, the revision petition against the conviction was decided.

(3.) OBVIOUSLY, the controversy in the cases of Gopalsingh, Dhawaniram and Purushottam Singh related to the important question whether a civil servant can be dismissed on the basis of his initial conviction, even though the appeal or revision is pending and there is every chance of the conviction to be set aside by the appellate court.