INDRA NATH BHAGAT Vs. DUKHA BHAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application has been filed on behalf of the respondent under Ss. 83(1), 86(1) and 97 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for deciding the preliminary issue about the maintainability of Election Petition and praying therein to dismiss the Election Petition on account of non-compliance of mandatory provision.

(2.) It is stated that there are vague and bald allegation as there is no material in the Election petition which may give rise to valid cause of action. There is no attestation by the Election petitioner in the original and copy of the Election petition supplied to the respondent No.1 as well as there is no concise statement of material facts as required u/S.8 of the R.P. Act. There is also absenceof endorsement of Notrary Public /Oath Commissioner on the copy of the affidavit accompanying the Election petition. The allegation as made in the Election petition are unnecessary, frivolous, vexatious, tainted and prejudiced as well as it is wrong to say that ballot papers of the Election petitioner belonging to another candidates were mixed with the bundle of ballot papers of respondent. There was no irregularities or illegality in counting as the respondent No. 1 was declared by a majority votes and the counting was done in accordance with law and as the allegations made are absured and vague and, therefore, Election petition is fit to be dismissed.

(3.) On the other hand, rejoinder has been filed on behalf of the petitioner claiming therein that the Election petition has been filed with concise statement of material facts as required under law and it has also been filed with full particulars. The Election petition has duly been signed and verified by the petitioner in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure. The said Election petition has also been accompanied by an affidavit in the prescribed form in support of the allegation. It is also claimed that in respect of matter deciding preliminary objection is not to be equated with the final decision which is made after adducing the evidence by the petitioner. The objection raised by the respondent about the maintainability of the election petition is only for the sake of objection as all the mandatory provision in relation to the filing of the Election petition have duly been followed and there is no infirmity in the election petition. The provision of S. 81 of the R.P. Act has fully been complied with and sufficient materials as required under law has been given in the Election petition for consideration. Thus, the objection raised by the respondent about the maintainability of the petition is fit to be dismissed.