Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.29 seconds)Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 173 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961
Section 20 in Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
S.V. Viswanathan vs G.P. Rangaswamy And Ors. on 11 July, 1966
Tribunal (supra) and the Madras High Court in Viswanathan v.
Rangaswamy (supra) took a different view even after taking
note of the decision of this Court. Both these decisions,
as we have pointed out earlier, proceed on a wholly wrong
assumption.
Roop Lal Mehta vs Dhan Singh And Ors. on 17 May, 1967
The decisions of the Madras, Andhra and Kerala High Courts,
already referred to, should be held to be erroneous and that
of the Gujarat High Court in Mahmadhusein v. O. Fidaali(1),
Allahabad Court in Ghulam Mohiuddin v. Election Tribunal(2)
, Bombay High-Court in Jagannath v. Sukhdeo(3), and Punjab
and Haryana High Court in Roop Lal Mehta v. Dhan Singh
(supra) as correct. In this case, therefore, it was not
open either for the Election Tribunal or for the High Court
to go into the question regarding the appellant's age. The
latest decision of Kailasam.
Durga Shankar Mehta vs Thakur Raghuraj Singh And Others on 19 May, 1954
In Durga Shankar Mehta v. Thakur Reghuraj Singh (supra)
Court observed
"In other words, the electoral roll is
conclusive as to the qualification of the
elector except where a disqualification is
expressly alleged or proved. The electoral
roll in the case of Vasant Rao did describe
him as having been of proper age and on the
face of it therefore he was fully qualified to
he chosen a member of the State Legislative
Assembly. As no objection was taken to his
nomination before the Returning Officer at the
time of scrutiny, the latter was bound to take
the entry in the electoral roll as conclusive;
and if in these Circumstances he did not
reject the nomination of Vasant Rao, it cannot
be said that this was an improper acceptance
of nomination on his part............ It would
have been an improper acceptance, if the want
of qualification was apparent on the electoral
roll itself....... But the election should he
held to be void on the ground of the
constitutional disqualification of the
candidate and not on the ground that hi-,
nomination was improperly accepted by the
Returning Officer."
Section 10 in Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
P. Subramaniam vs S. Pachamuthu And Ors. on 19 January, 1972
J. in P. Subramanuam v. S.
Pachamuthu & Ors.(4) is consistent with the view we have
taken.