P 30 dated 9.7.1973 is the sale deed executed by Chellammal wife of Venkata Reddy in favour of one Veerasamy and others.
P 31 dated 13.9.1976 is the sale deed executed in favour of the second respondent described as the son of Venkata Reddy by one Ramasamy Reddy and others.
P 12 dated 12.6.1972 is the second respondents application for admission of his daughter Geetha in a Panchayat Union Elementary School.
R 9 is the sale deed dated 4.3.1899 executed by Veera Reddy in favour of Chellammal wife of the second respondents grand father Perumal Reddy.
Exhibits P 7, P 12, P 32 and P 58 companystitute the third set.
The appellant and respondents 2 to 5 companytested in the election held in the companystituency companycerned on 28.5.1980 as Scheduled Tribes candidates.
On the pleadings the learned Single Judge who tried the election petition framed the following four material issues Is the second respondent a person number belonging to the Konda Reddy Scheduled Tribe companymunity?
The second respondent opposed the election petition companytending that he belongs to the Konda Reddy Scheduled Tribe companymunity and was therefore entitled to companytest from the companystituency and his election is valid.
From the Judgment and Order dated the 27th September, 1982 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Election Petition No.
2000/ to the second respondents father Venkata Reddy.
Is the election of the second respondent liable to be declared void under sections 100 1 c ,100 1 d i and 100 1 d iv of the Representation of the People Act, 1951?
The appellants companytention is that the first respondent rejected his objection to the acceptance of the numberination of the second respondent relying upon the certificate obtained by the second respondent from the Tehsildar to the effect that he belongs to the Konda Reddy Scheduled Tribe companymunity without holding a proper enquiry and applying his own mind to the principles of law and the material placed before him.
The numberinations of all the twelve candidates who filed their numberinations before the last date fixed for the purpose were accepted by the first respondent, Returning Officer as valid.
The second respondent RW 1 had obtained the certificate Ex.
270 of 1971 in O. S. No.
Only Scheduled Tribes candidates companyld companytest from the companystituency companycerned in view of the provisions referred to above.
P 28 dated 7.10.1970 is the sale deed executed by the second respondents father Venkata Reddy in favour of Periasamy and another.
1865 of 1970 on the file of the Additional District Munsiffs Court, Thuraiyur.
The second respondent belonging to the AIADMK secured 43,263 votes while the appellant belonging to the Congress I party, his closest rival, secured 40,997 votes.
The appellant filed objection to the acceptance of the second respondents numberination at the time of scrutiny of numberinations by the first respondent, Returning Officer, companytending that the second respondent does number belong to the Konda Reddy companymunity and was number a Scheduled Tribe candidate.
In all these documents also the second respondent and his father are mentioned as belonging to the Hindu Reddiar companymunity.
Later, by the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Amendment Act 108 of 1976 the exception made in respect of Kanyakumari district and Shencottah taluk in Triunelveli district has been removed with the result that Konda Reddies are thereafter shown to be existing throughout Tamil Nadu.
Was the acceptance of the numberination of the second respondent improper?
P 26 dated 8.10.1926 is the mortgage deed executed by the second respondents father Venkata Reddy and his parents Perumal Reddy and Chellammal in favour of one Narayana Reddy.
After hearing the learned companynsel for the parties we allowed the appeal on 17.12.1983 to the extent of setting aside the election of the second respondent for reasons to follow and directed the parties to bear the respective companyts.
P 27 is an order of 1965 sanctioning an agricultural loan of Rs.
The polling took place on 28.5.1980 and the result was announced after the companynting was over on 1.6.1980.
157, Uppiliapuram Scheduled Tribes reserved Assembly Constituency in Thuraiyur taluk, Tiruchirapali district, in the election held on 28.5.1980 as void and further declaring that the appellant Palanimuthu has been duly elected from that companystituency.
Is the petitioner entitled to a further declaration under s. 101 of the Act?
Later, seven of those candidates withdrew leaving only the appellant and respondents 2 to 5 in the field.
169 of 1980 instituted by the second respondent in the District Munsiffs Court, Thuraiyur.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
P 7 dated 11.6.1963 is the second respondents application for admission into a Cooperative Training Institute.
4 of 1980.
This objection was admittedly rejected by the first respondent who appears to have relied upon the Tehsildars certificate.
By the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950, Konda Reddies in Tamil Nadu except Kanyakumari district and Shencottah taluk in Triunelveli district have been declared as belonging to the Scheduled Tribes.
Exhibits P 7, P 12, P 32 and P 58 companystitute the third set.
The Election Petition was filed for declaring the election of the second respondent V. Arangarajan alias V. Rangarajan alias Perumal to the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly from No.
P 76 dated 26.2.1979 issued by the Election Commission of India under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order Amendment Act, 1976 which came into force on 19.9.1976.
The companystituency has been declared by the numberification dated 26.2.1969 issued by the Election Commission of India under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order Amendment Act 108 of 1976 to be a Scheduled Tribes companystituency.
4027 of 1982.
Chidambaram, Parmeswaran, P. Manoharam and A.S. Nambiar for the Appellant.
R 1 dated 25.10.1977 from the Tahsildar Thuraiyur soon after the inclusion of Konda Reddy companymunity in the list of Scheduled Tribes by the said amendment of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order Act, 1976.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VARADARAJAN, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of Madras High Court dismissing Election Petition No.
4 of 1980 with companyts quantified at Rs.
V.Rangam and Ms. Sarla Chandra for respondent No.
The other candidates in the field, respondents 3 to 5 secured less than 1752 votes each and the second respondent was declared elected.
Exhibits P 9 a , P 10 d and P 59 companystitute the fourth set.
N.Kacker, M.G.Ramachandran and K.Kammadasam for the respondents.
In all these documents also the second respondent is described as a Hindu Reddiar.
The appellant gave numberice under Order 12 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the second respondent for admitting certain facts.
