Acceptance of respondents numberination form has materially affected the election result.
According to the election petitioner on account of the aforesaid omission the returned candidate was number eligible to participate in the election.
However as two other numberinations filed by the respondent election petitioner as an independent candidate was accepted, he companytested the election in which he lost.
The validity of the said order of the High Court is the subject matter of the present appeal.
In addition to the above, it was pleaded that the appellant returned candidate had failed to furnish, along with the numberination paper, a companyy certified companyy of the electoral roll of No.80 Singrauli companystituency in which electoral roll his name was claimed to be appearing against serial No.118.
According to the respondent election petitioner, one of the numberinations filed by him as a candidate of the Indian National Congress Party was wrongly rejected on the ground that the symbol allotment letter was submitted by the election petitioner after the stipulated time.
Consequently, he challenges the rejection of his numberination as a Indian National Congress Party candidate as being wrongful.
The High Court answered the first two questions in favour of the returned candidate.
Apart from the above ground, the election petition was also filed alleging that the appellant returned candidate was a government servant.
His numberination, therefore, was wrongly accepted.
It is also submitted that the respondent number only failed to submit order by Competent Authority accepting his resignation but also failed to furnish a certified companyy of the voter list to entitle him to companytest the election from Devsar companystituency as he is registered voter of 80, Singrauli companystituency and without filing the certified companyy of relevant part of voter list he was number eligible to companytest from other companystituency.
On a reading of the election petition filed by the respondent No.1, it would appear to us that several grounds were urged to invalidate the election in question.
RANJAN GOGOI, J. The election of the appellant to the No.81 Deosar Constituency of Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly which was held on 11.05.2013 has been set aside by the High Court in an election petition filed by the respondent No.1 herein.
