Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.21 seconds)
M. Veerabhadra Rao, President, M.P.P. vs Election Tribunal-Cum-Subordinate ... on 18 June, 1997
cites
Section 153 in Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 [Entire Act]
Section 201 in Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 [Entire Act]
Section 275 in Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 [Entire Act]
Reserve Bank Of India vs Peerless General Finance & Investment ... on 22 January, 1987
10. It was then argued on behalf of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that any lacuna or omission can be cured by interpreting the Section in such a way as to give effect to the objects of the Section. In fact, this is the plea made by the learned Counsel for the respondents also. But I am of the opinion that it is not possible to interpret a Section where it is silent. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that since the Section is silent, the ordinary provision relating to the counting of vote should apply and there is no reason why the vote cast by a defecting member should be ignored. The learned Counsel for the respondents, however, pointed out that since the Act provides for instant disqualification of any such candidate, the votes will be inconsistent with such disqualification. He also drew my attention to the observations of the Supreme Court in Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless G.F.I. Company Limited, AIR 1987 SC 1023 at 1042. and submitted that it is not only the text but also the colour of the context which should give proper meaning to the statute. For this purpose, if we look at the statement of objects and reasons, we find that one of the objects was to amend Section 153 in order to hold elections to the office of the President of the Mandal Parishad by show of hands obeying the Party Whip and to provide for the cessation of the member who disobeys the Party Whip (Clause 7 of the Bill). In other words, it appears that the election was to be conducted on party lines and the whip of the party was to be enforced by disqualifying the member who does not follow the whip. Looking at it from the point of enforcement of a whip, it appears to me that if a member, abstains from voting, then the intention of the party whip to get the candidate elected may still be possible even though the member concerned may be disqualified. But if the member had voted for the other candidate, he would be able to defeat the intention of the whip altogether. From this point of view it appears to me that in order to effectuate the object of this proviso particularly when the election is by show of hands, the vote cast by the defecting member should not be counted at all. The interpretation placed by the State Election Commissioner in the notification, in my opinion, does not effectuate the object and intention of the legislation. No doubt, the defacto doctrine postulates that an act of a disqualified person would still be valid but that doctrine has no place in the scheme of this legislation.
Pulin Behary Das And Ors. vs Emperor on 2 April, 1912
The de facto doctrine is that the acts of the officers de facto performed by them within the scope of their assumed official authority, in the interest of the public or third persons and not for their own benefit, are generally as valid and binding as if they were the acts of the officers de jure (Pulin Behari v. King Emperor. (1912) 15 Cal L.J. 517 at p.574). This doctrine postulates that the act carried out is valid until set aside even though the person carrying out that act is disqualified. In other words, the acts complained of was not the reason for the disqualification but was independent of it. But in the present cases, it was the very defiant act which disqualifies the member. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the said doctrine will not apply to the present cases.
1