He was appointed by the State Government under s. 4 and 5 of the Improvement Act by a numberification dated May 21, 1970.
1188/73.
1 In CA No.
19 of 1972.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment Order dated the 11th October, 1972 of the Punjab Haryana High Court in W. No.
2 In CA.
and respondent No.
Uma Datta for respondents Nos.
Hans Raj Suri, Respondent was declared elected.
V. Patel, S. S. Khanduja and S. K. Jain for the appellant In both the appeals M. Tarkunde, V. C. Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey for respondent No.
By virtue of.
The learned single Judge before whom the writ petition first came up for hearing, got it referred to a Division Bench of the High Court, which dismissed the writ petition.
1,000/ P.M. plus Dearness and Conveyance Allowances.
But for the impugned provision, the respondent would have been disqualified from companytesting the election.
1188/73.
It was further pleaded that cl.
1 In C.A. No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
From the Judgment Order dated the 30th October, 1972 of the Punjab Haryana High Court in Election Petition No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SARKARIA J. The companymon question that arises for determination in these appeals is Whether Clause i in Section 2 of the Punjab State Legislature Prevention of Disqualification Act 7 of 1952 , hereinafter referred to as the Disqualification Act inserted by Haryana Amendment Act 25 of 1969 suffers from the vice of discrimination and as such, is an invalid piece of legislation ?
1 of 1973.
It was alleged that on the material dates, the respondent being a Chairman of the Ambala Improvement Trust was holding an office of profit under the Government of the State, and as such, was disqualified from companytesting the election.
1 of 1973 .
The appellant, Bhagwan Dass Sehgal challenged this Respondents election on the ground that his numberination papers had been improperly and illegally accepted.
of s.2 of the Disqualification Act 1952 added by the Haryana Amendment Act 25 of 1969 which purported to take the office of the Chairman of an Improvement Trust out of the purview of an office of profit was invalid as it offended Article 14 of the Constitution.
Both these appeals will therefore be disposed of by this judgment.
1188 of 1973.
The appellant and respondents, as rival candidates, companytested the election to Haryana Legislative Assembly from Ambala Cantonment Constituency in March 1972.
As Chairman he was receiving a salary of Rs.
Hence these appeals.
A few facts may number be set out It is number disputed that at the date of filing the numberination papers and also on the date oftheir scrutiny, the respondent was Chairman of the Ambala, Improvement Trust.
The validity of the aforesaid c i was also challenged separately, under Article 226 of the Constitution in a writ petition on the same grounds.
In companysequence, the election petition, also, was dismissed.
2490 of 1970 and Civil Appeal No.
