Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.48 seconds)

Rajani Kumari vs The State Election Commission Bihar & O on 16 March, 2017

9. The petitioner submitted her reply and maintained her stand that the entire complaint is not maintainable in the light of dictum laid down in case of Rajani Kumari vs State Election Commission & Ors. reported in 2019(4) PLJR 673(FB) as there was no unimpeachable evidence before 'the Commission' based upon which she could be disqualified and secondly being in light of several evidences also, since admittedly, the writ petitioner was above 21 years of age on the date of scrutiny, she was qualified to contest the election
Patna High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 9 - A Amanullah - Full Document

Kanimozhi Karunanidhi vs A. Santhana Kumar on 4 May, 2023

If he could make oral objection, he could as well, have made objection in writing against the acceptance of nomination of the Appellant, and in that case the Returning Officer would have decided his objection under sub-section (2) of Section 36, after holding a summary inquiry. Even if it is accepted that he had raised an oral objection with regard to the educational qualification of the Appellant be- fore the Returning Officer at the time of scrutiny, the respondent No. 1 has failed to make averment in the Election Petition as to how Appellant's nomination was liable to be rejected by the Returning Officer on the grounds mentioned in Section 36(2) of the Act, so as to make his case fall under clause Patna High Court CWJC No.18090 of 2023 dt.13-09-2024
Supreme Court of India Cites 44 - Cited by 1 - B M Trivedi - Full Document
1   2 Next