Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

21. It is, therefore, necessary to see as to what is the date of the election in this particular case. Sections 53 and 66 which are referred in Section 67A also would be relevant for the purpose of deciding the date of election. Section 53 deals with the procedure in the case of contested and uncontested election. Section 53 reads as under :

"53. Procedure in contested and uncontested elections. -- (1) If the number of contesting candidates is more than the number of seats to be filled, a poll shall be taken.

22. In the present case since the election is admittedly uncontested the provisions of Sub-clause (2) would be applicable. Sub-clause (2) merely stipulates that if there is no contest the returning officer shall forthwith declare the result of the election. Section 66 which is also referred to in Section 67A, speaks about the declaration of result. Section 66 reads as under :

"66. Declaration of results. -- When the counting of the votes has been completed, the returning officer shall, in the absence of any direction by the Election Commission to the contrary, forthwith declare the result of the election in the manner provided by this Act or the rules made thereunder."

Section 66 also categorically states that the returning officer shall forthwith declared the result as provided by the Act or the rules. It would be relevant to examine Rules in respect of the declaration of result. Rule 11 talks about publication of lists of contesting the candidates and the declaration of the result in uncontested election. Rule 11 reads as under :

"11. Publication of list of contesting candidates and declaration of result in uncontested election. -- (1) The returning officer shall, immediately after its preparation, cause a copy of the list of contesting candidates to be affixed in some conspicuous place in his office and where the number of contesting candidates is equal to, or less than the number of seats to be filled, he shall, immediately after such affixation, declare under Sub-section (2) or, as the case may be, Sub-section (3) of Section 53 the result of the election in such one of the Forms 21 to 21-B as may be appropriate and send signed copies of the declaration to the appropriate authority, the Election Commission and the Chief Electoral Officer.
(2) If a poll becomes necessary under Sub-section (1) of Section 53, the returning officer shall supply a copy of the list of contesting candidates to each such candidate or his election agent, and ,then shall also publish the list in the Official Gazette."

The said Rule also clearly stipulates that in the case of an uncontested election the result should be declared under Sub-section (2) of Section 53 in such one of the Forms 21 to 21-B and thereafter sent the signed copies of the declaration to the appropriate authority, the Election Commission and the Chief Electoral Officer. Sub-rule of Rule 11 would not be relevant in this particular case as this is a case where the election was not contested. It will be relevant to note here that even Rule 11 does not make any reference to Form No. 24. Rule 11 only talks about Forms 21 to 21-B. Forms 21 and 21-A are the Forms for the declaration of the Result in case of seat in General Election which is uncontested. Therefore, in the present case Form 21-B is not relevant. Form 24 which is not even referred to in Rule 11 is in respect of certificate of election which is issued by the returning officer as required under Rule 85. It is the contention of the petitioner that this certificate as required under Rule 85 was issued by the returning officer on 15-6-2002 and, therefore, the date of election would be 15-6-2002. This contention of the petitioner cannot be sustained. Perusal of the relevant section clearly indicates that the date of election would be the date on which the returning officer declares the election. In this case, it is an admitted position that the returning officer had declared the election on 8-6-2002. This fact is also admitted by the petitioner in paras 4 and 14 of the Election Petition. This fact therefore, is an undisputed fact. The contention of the petitioner that the certificate as required under Rule 85 was issued by the Election Commission on 15-6-2002 and, therefore, this should be treated as a date of election cannot be accepted. Rule 85 reads as under :