There is also on record a letter dated May 5, 1980 addressed by Shri Darbara Singh, President, Punjab Pradesh Congress I Committee, to the respondent stating that Jagmohan Singh had been finally selected as the official candidate of the Indian National Congress I from the 99 Moga Assembly Constituency in his place, and he was advised to withdraw his numberination paper.
The averments in paragraphs 4 to 18 related to the change of symbols allotted to the respondent viz.
It is then averred in paragraph On a perusal of para 18 of the Symbols Order it is clear that the Election Commission has numberpower to issue instructions and directions to the Returning Officer of an Assembly Constituency to re allot the symbol once allotted to a companytesting candidate under sub rule 4 of rule 10 of the Conduct of Elections Rules and to allot the symbol reserved for a National Party who has allotted the symbol to a candidate deemed to be set up by that political party under para 13 of the Symbols Order to any other person after the publication of the list of the companytesting candidates in Form 7A. In paragraph 15 after stating that Jagmohan Singh had delivered to the Returning Officer a numberice in writing as provided for under paragraph 13 b from Shri Darbara Singh, President, Punjab Pradesh Congress I Committee, who was duly authorized by the Indian National Congress I to issue such authorization as envisaged under paragraph 13 c , the appellant avers that the action of the Returning Officer in recalling on May 8, 1980 the allotment of the symbol hand to Jagmohan Singh on May 5, 1980 and allotting the same to the respondent, was in violation of the provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder, and the result of the election, insofar as it companycerns the returned candidate i.e. the respondent, has been materially affected inasmuch as because of the change of symbol Jagmohan Singh got only 242 votes while the respondent companyld number have secured more than the same number if he had companytested on the symbol bow arrow earlier allotted to him.
Thereafter, Shri Ganesan, Secretary to the Election Commission, got in touch with the Chief Electoral Officer, Chandigarh and informed him that the respondent was the official candidate of the Indian National Congress I .
Upon these facts, it is averred in paragraph 12 that Jagmohan Singh alone be deemed to be set up as a candidate by the Indian National Congress I within the meaning of paragraph 13 of the Election Symbols Reservation Allotment Order, 1968 and number the respondent, and that the candidates companyld withdraw their numberination papers under s. 37 1 before 3 p.m. on May 5, 1980 which was numberified by the Election Commission to be the last date for withdrawal of candidatures under s. 30 c and thereafter the Returning Officer was enjoined under s. 38 1 to publish in the prescribed Form 7A the names and addresses of the companytesting candidates together with the symbols allotted to them.
On May 8, 1980, the Returning Officer, Moga Vidhan Sabha Assembly Constituency, addressed a letter to all the candidates regarding the change in the allotment of election symbols to the effect According to the instructions from the Chief Election Commissioner of India, certain change has been effected in the election symbols of the candidates of the election to the 99 Moga Legislative Assembly Constituency which is as under No.
By the judgment under appeal, the High Court sustained the preliminary objection and directed that the averments in paragraphs 4 to 18 be struck out from the election petition.
A letter to this effect was also delivered by Smt.
If the respondent had number been allotted the reserved symbol hand of the Indian National Congress I , he companyld number have won the election.
From the Judgment and Order dated the 22nd February, 1981 of the Punjab Haryana High Court in Election Petition No.
The respondent filed a written statement companytroverting the allegation that there was a breach of paragraph 13 of the Symbols Order by the change of allotment of symbols made by the Returning Officer in accordance with the instructions issued by the Election Commission.
hand instead of bow arrow allotted to Jagmohan Singh.
It was alleged that after the respondent had been adopted as a candidate by the Indian National Congress I , Jagmohan Singh made an effort to get that partys ticket for the seat and produced a letter from Shri Darbara Singh dated May 5, 1980 before the Returning Officer showing that he was the official candidate of the Indian National Congress I .
On May 7, 1980, the Returning Officer, Moga Vidhan Sabha Assembly Constituency wrote a letter to Jagmohan Singh stating that he had been directed by the Secretary, Election Commission of India, by means of a police radio message that the respondent was to be treated as the finally selected candidate, and that partys reserved symbol hand be allotted to him.
The appellant filed an election petition challenging the election of the respondent under s. 100 1 d iv read with s. 123 7 of the Act.
As against this, the appellant, who was a candidate of the Lok Dal party, secured 16,686 votes while the aforesaid Jagmohan Singh as an Independent candidate got 242 votes.
It appears that on that day Shri Darbara Singh, President of the Punjab Pradesh Congress I Committee, intimated the Returning Officer that Jagmohan Singh had been numberinated as the official candidate of the Indian National Congress I to companytest the election.
In paragraphs 16, 17 and 18, the appellant set out some facts showing how the result of the election, insofar as it companycerns the respondent, has been materially affected by the change of allotment of symbols.
The respondent fought the election on the reserved symbol of the Indian National Congress I hand and secured 22,460 votes.
3 of 1980.
When the respondent learnt of this move on the part of Jagmohan Singh, he met the President of the Indian National Congress I at New Delhi on the morning of May 5, 1980 and apprised her of the situation and was informed that he had been finally selected as the party candidate and there was numberquestion of a change.
G. Brar, Member of Parliament to the Election Commission on the morning of May 5, 1980.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
There was a mention of this talk in the telex message sent by the Secretary to the Returning Officer, Moga, with companyy to the Chief Electoral Officer, Punjab on May 5, 1980.
The appellant was therefore defeated by the respondent by a margin of 5,774 votes.
99 on the ground that there is number disclosure of material facts on which he alleges that the change of allotment of symbols by the Returning Officer, Moga amounted to number compliance with the provisions of the Constitution, or of the Act, or any rules or orders made thereunder so that the result of the election, insofar as it companycerns the respondent i.e. the returned candidate, is materially affected.
1106 NCE of 1981.
V. Patel, A.S. Sohal and M.C. Dhingra for the Appellant.
The last date for withdrawal of numberination papers was numberified as May 5, 1980.
99 the appellant companytested as a candidate of the Lok Dal Party.
It was pleaded, inter alia, that the respondent had made a declaration in the numberination paper filed by him on May 2, 1980 to the effect that he had been selected as a candidate of the Indian National Congress I and that he had on May 5, 1980 furnished a numberice to the Returning Officer signed and issued by Shri Darbara Singh, President, Punjab Pradesh Congress I Committee, in pursuance of paragraph 13 b of the Symbols Order.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEN, J. This appeal by special leave is from a judgment and order of the Punjab Haryana High Court dated February 2, 1981 by which it has directed the deletion of paragraphs 4 to 18 of the election petition filed by the appellant under s. 81 read with s. 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 Act for short calling in question the election of the respondent Nachhattar Singh Gill to the State Legislative Assembly of Punjab from the Moga Assembly Constituency No.
R. Mridul and R.S. Sodhi for the Respondent.
The High Court accordingly framed a preliminary issue to the effect Whether paragraphs 4 to 18, 19 a and 20 of the election petition have to be deleted because the averments made therein do number make out any case for setting aside the election under s. 100 1 d iv and s. 123 7 of the Representation of the People Act.
At the last general elections to the State Legislative Assembly of Punjab from Moga Assembly Constituency No.
A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the respondent that the averments in paragraphs 4 to 18 as well as paragraphs 19A and 20, with which we are number companycerned, do number disclose any cause of action and therefore they are liable to be deleted under Order VII, r. 11 a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
It appears that the Indian National Congress I changed its official candidate and finally selected the respondent Nachhattar Singh Gill to be the official candidate of its party.
Name of the Candidate Symbol Allotted Shri Nachhattar Singh HAND Shri Jagmohan Singh BOW ARROW Accordingly, the necessary change of symbols was effected in Form 7A, the list of companytesting candidates.
It is further averred that a companymunication was sent by Shri Buta Singh on May 5, 1980 to the Chief Election Officer, Punjab, Chandigarh and the Returning Officer, 99 Moga Assembly Constituency, in supersession of all earlier companymunications with regard to the Assembly Constituency, stating that the respondent was the official candidate of the Indian National Congress I and that the partys symbol hand be allotted to him.
