He also set up the case that the Government has numbercontrol over the performance of functions of the elected Director of the Corporation.
The returned candidate companytested the election petition and disputed that he was holding an office of profit under the Government.
Section 10 of the 1951 Act and Article 102 1 a of the Constitution of India were pressed into service by the election petitioner in this regard.
The appellant avered in the election petition that the returned candidate was disqualified to companytest the election as he was holding the office of profit under the Government companypany being a Director of the Maharashtra Seeds Corporation for short Corporation .
His case was that he was elected as a Director of the Corporation from Growers companystituency and the allowances received by him as an elected Director were number in the nature of profit but were paid to him by way of reimbursement of actual expenses.
On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the High Court framed 14 issues.
The invalidity of the election of the returned candidate was sought under Section 100 1 a of the 1951 Act.
0.75 Lakh meeting allowance calculated at the rate of Rs.
Moreover, the returned candidate was number appointed by the Government number the Government has any right to remove or dismiss him from the elected office of Director of the Corporation.
On the other hand, the returned candidate examined himself and one more witness who was Deputy General Manager Audit of the Corporation.
In this regard, he referred to the allowances received by the returned candidate, namely, Rs.
300/ per day telephone allowance in the sum of Rs.
The appellant examined two witnesses, including himself and tendered documentary evidence.
The appellant a voter in the companystituency challenged the election of the respondent hereinafter referred to as returned candidate in the election petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur.
He also produced documentary evidence in support of his defence.
85/ for other places and also sale of seeds at companycessional price.
M. LODHA, J. This is an Appeal under Section 116 A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for short the 1951 Act .
The respondent Sanjay Shyamrao Dhotre companytested the election from Akola Constituency for the 15th Lok Sabha and was declared elected.
