Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. The first respondent/Returned Candidate filed a counter statement, wherein it is stated as follows:

This respondent was elected with the margin of 1094 votes than the petitioner herein. It is false to state that the police and other officers involved in the election process always turned a blind eye on the lapses and http://www.judis.nic.in contravention of the code of conduct. It is false to state that this respondent suppressed and misrepresented several material facts in her affidavit filed under Section 33(a)(i) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It is false to state that this respondent has forged certain documents to claim her residential status. The father of this respondent is a native of Puducherry and they belong to 'Parayan' community and origin, which is coming under the Schedule Caste.

e) The first respondent was duly sponsored by her party, AINRC Constituency to contest for the post of MLA Nedungadu (SC) Constituency and Form A and Form B were duly signed by her party leader. Form A was delivered to the Chief Electoral Officer and to the Returning Officer before 3 p.m. on the last day of making nominations. It is false to state that she failed to deliver Form A to the Returning Officer and the Chief Electoral Officer. She submitted those documents within the time stipulated. It is false to state that this respondent belongs to a caste by name "Conemotto" community. She belongs to community called "Parayan" a Schedule Caste community. There is absolutely no evidence to show that they belong to "Conemotto" community. Even assuming that she born outside the jurisdiction of Puducherry, she is entitled to get a residential certificate of Union Territory of Puducherry, since http://www.judis.nic.in her parents are residing in Puducherry for the past two decades. As per the Presidential Order 1964, those who have born before 31.03.1964, have to be treated as origin of Puducherry Schedule Caste. Therefore, her Birth Certificate and other details issued by the concerned departments are valid. The information obtained by the petitioner under the RTI Act has nothing to do with her eligibility or criteria to contest in the election. While applying the residence/community certificate before the concerned officials, she had enclosed all the proofs as required under law and after verifying all the documents, the concerned Officials issued residential/community certificate to this respondent. The non filling up of the blanks in the application has nothing to do with the consideration of the said application, since she had enclosed all the proofs.

26. The subject matter constituency is a reserved constituency. The election petitioner and the first respondent along with other candidates contested the election by claiming themselves as persons belonging to scheduled caste. The first respondent claims to belong "Parayan" community, which is admittedly a notified schedule caste. In support of her claim, the first respondent filed the Caste Certificate, which is found in Ex.P1 series showing that she belongs to Hindu Parayan caste, which is recognised as a scheduled caste. Except to state that the first respondent has not properly filled up the application before the Tahsildar to obtain the residential, caste and nationality certificates, the election petitioner did not produce any contra evidence to show that the first respondent belongs to some other caste or she does not belong to a scheduled caste community to contest in the reserved constituency.

27. Certain corrections made in the applications submitted by the first respondent itself cannot be stated as vital factor to conclude as if the caste certificate issued to the first respondent is not genuine, in the absence of any contra evidence. On the other hand, the Tahsildar, who was examined as http://www.judis.nic.in P.W.5, has stated that he only issued caste certificate in Ex.P1 and based on the recommendations given by the Village Administrative Officer and Revenue Inspector, he issued the Caste Certificate to the first respondent. The report submitted by the Village Administrative Officer, Nedungadu forms part of Ex.P1 series, wherein he has clearly stated that the first respondent was a resident of Nedungadu from her birth i.e.11.07.1989 to 24.06.2009 and 25.06.2009, December 2010 (After marriage) and further shifted to Rasathi Nagar, Karaikal due to personal problem. In the said report, it is also stated that the first respondent belongs to Hindu Parayan by origin. Except certain corrections made in the application submitted by the first respondent, nothing adverse against the caste and residence certificate issued in favour of the first respondent is spoken to by any of the independent/official witnesses, except the interested testimony of the election petitioner as PW1. It is not enough to state that a document is bogus without substantiating such claim by adducing material evidence. The officials have not deposed that the caste and residence certificates produced by the first respondent are not issued by them. On the other hand, they admit the issuance of the same by themselves.