MADHARAPU TARAVVA TARA Vs. TELANGANA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these Writ Petitions, issue involved is one and the same, as such, they are being taken up for disposal. It is the plea of the petitioners that as a matter of fact, they submitted the statement of election expenditure in compliance with Rule 103(2) of the Telangana Panchayat Raj (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 2018 (for short 'the Rules'), but, respondent No.1 - Telangana State Election Commission, Hyderabad, issued proceedings dtd. 3/3/2020 disqualifying them from the elected post and from contesting the elections for a period of three (3) years to any post on the ground that there was no statement of election expenditure submitted by them.

(2.) In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.5 - Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Thangallapalli Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District, it is asserted that he had taken charge on 19/7/2019 and that initially, basing on the web portal, a list of particulars, in which, names of the petitioners were mentioned as the persons who had not submitted the statement of election expenditure, was sent to respondent No.1, thereby, a notice dtd. 25/11/2019 was issued to the petitioners by respondent No.1.

(3.) Thereafter, the petitioners submitted their statements of election expenditure along with their written explanation on 7/2/2020 stating that they could not file the statement of election expenditure within the stipulated time, since they used to visit the hospitals at the relevant point of time. Thereafter, the petitioners in the third week of March, 2020, approached the answering respondent showing receipt dtd. 11/2/2019 of filing final account of election expenditure and requested him to enquire into the same. Then, he caused enquiry and found the copies of final accounts of election expenditure of the petitioners. Thereafter, he addressed letter dtd. 3/4/2020 to respondent No.1 explaining the facts and finding the copies of the accounts of election expenditure submitted by the petitioners with a request to cancel the impugned proceedings. It is also asserted that a memo dtd. 26/3/2020 was issued to the then Senior Assistant, T. Nagaraju, of erstwhile MPDO Office to show the reason for not entering the petitioners' names in online portal of respondent No.1 in the list of candidates, who had submitted the statement of election expenditure. The said Senior Assistant gave explanation on 27/3/2020 that there was lapse on his part in updating the web portal as he is a Cancer patient and in view of series of elections. Thereafter, respondent No.1 had addressed a letter to respondent No.3 - District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla, to verify the veracity of the petitioners' claim. Then, vide report dtd. 27/6/2020, respondent No.3 after conducting enquiry reported that as a matter of fact, the petitioners had submitted the statements of election expenditure as claimed by them and there was lapse on the part of the Officer concerned in updating the record and forwarding the same to respondent No.1.