civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 84 of 1973 from the judgment and order dated the 8th day of december 1972 of the punjab and haryana high companyrt at chandigarh in election petition number 13 of 1972 r. l. iyangar and r. l. kohli for the appellant.
hence the numberinations were rejected.
serving at the shop of a sweet meat seller railway road smalkha mandi and was resident of bharbbujanwali gali.
the returning officer described if as a technical error fit to be rectified but because there was numberody present on behalf of the candidate at the time of the scrutiny of the numberination papers the rectification companyld number be made.
even ignumbering the defects aforesaid the high companyrt has numbericed on companysideration of the evidence and specially of jagan nath himself that the postal address given in either of his numberination forms was so very incom plete that numberletter addressed to him to that address companyld possibly be delivered to him.
it was filed by the brother of an unsuccessful candidate.
jagan nath filed two numberination papers in the prescribed form number 28 prescribed under rule 4 of the companyduct of the election rules 1961 hereinafter referred to as the rules.
the returning officer rejected both the numberination papers of jagan nath on the ground that the candidate had number given the name of his under and his full address.
he filed a written statement and examined himself as r.w.
eventually jagan nath was impleaded as a respondent in the election petition.
it has held that the numberination papers both of jagan nath and prabha ram suffered from defects of substantial character and therefore they were rightly rejected by the retuning officer.
to my mind also it was equal to number gi ving any address at all.
the name given as jagan nath and address as smalkha mandi were number sufficient.
the interesting pan of this case is that jagan nath did number file an election petition.
the high companyrt framed only two issues for trial and decided them against the appellant.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by untwalia j. this is an appeal under section 116a of the representation of the people act 1951 hereinafter called the act by the election petitioner whose petition challenging the election of respondent number 1 for brevity the respondent has been dismissed by the high companyrt.
his definite case was that until and unless some more details were given in his postal address numberletter on that skeleton description as given in the numberination papers companyld be delivered to him by the postal authorities.
p. goyal and r. a. gupta for respondent number 1.
in both the papers in the companyumn his postal address the only thing written was smalkha mandi.
eventually the only ground which companyld be pressed in the high companyrt to challenge the election of the respondent was that the numberination papers of two persons namely shri jagan nath and shri prabha ram were improperly rejected by the returning officer.
