Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 36 (0.29 seconds)Article 243O in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 138 in The Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
The Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006
The Representation of the People Act, 1951
Section 137 in The Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
Article 329 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Sanjay Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 28 January, 2014
In the light of the principles enunciated in N.P.
Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency
(AIR 1952 SC 64), Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election
Commr., reported in (1978) 1 SCC 405, Anurag Narain Singh
vs State of UP, reported in (1996) 6 SCC 303, C.
Subrahmanyam v. K. Ramanjaneyullu, reported in (1998) 8
SCC 703, Election Commission of India vs. Ashok Kumar,
reported in (2000) 8 SCC 216], P. Manjula v. State of A.P.,
reported in (2007) 15 SCC 766, and the decision of this court, in
Sanjay Kumar vs. State of Bihar, reported in 2009 (3) PLJR
933, we are clearly of the view that the mandate of Article 243-O
of the Constitution is that extraordinary jurisdiction of a High
Court can only be invoked to facilitate and subserve the process
of election and not to thwart or derail the process of election. In
clear and unequivocal terms, the Constitution Bench, in
Mohinder Singh Gill‟s case (supra), held that once the election
process is complete, the result of election or election itself can be
called in question only by way of an election petition and not by
invoking High Court‟s jurisdiction under Article 226.