From the Judgment and Order dated 31 1 75 of the Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench in Election Petition No.
1,130 to Sena Yaima Sarma, Rs.
The election petition was dismissed by the Gauhati High Court.
The respondent was the Speaker of Manipur Legislative Assem bly at the relevant time.
The appellant has number companye up in appeal against the judgment of the High Court.
The case of the appellant is that the respondent paid Rs.
The respondent, who was a candidate sponsored by the Manipur peoples Party secured 5,033 votes, while the appellant who was Iris nearest rival secured 2,473 votes.
The appellant, who was one of the rival candidates, filed an election petition to challenge the election of the respondent.
One of the grounds was that the respondent being Speaker of the Assembly held an office of profit in the State Govern ment and as such was disqualified to seek election.
1 hereinaf ter referred to as the respondent was declared elected from the Patsoi Assembly companystituency.
The appellant chal lenged the election of the respondent on two main grounds.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The respondent, however companytinued to hold the office of the Speaker fill March 8, 1974.
It was also stated that some of the expenses incurred by the respondent for the purpose of election had number been shown by him in the return filed by him, and as such, he was guilty of companyrupt practice.
799 of 1975.
Janardhan Sharma and Jitendra Sharma for the appellant.
There were some other candidates, but we are number companycerned with them.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KHANNA, J. In the mid term poll to Manipur Legislative Assembly held in February 1974, respondent No.
The Assembly was dissolved in 1973.
1,000 to Hijam Iboton Singh for use of microphones in companynection with his election.
V. Gupte Naunit Lal and Miss Lalita Kohli, for Respondent No.
