Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-21-1970
Reported in : (1970)72BOMLR630; 1971MhLJ61
..... , namakkal constituency : [1952]1scr218 , the appellant, who was a candidate for election to the madras legislative assembly and whose nomination paper was rejected by the returning officer, applied to the high court of madras under article 226 of the constitution for quashing that order. article 329(b) of the constitution provides, in so far as is material, that no election to a legislature of a state shall be called in question, except by an election petition. the representation of people act, 1951 also provided by section 80 that no election ..... any action taken or to be taken by the competent authority or the state government in the exercise of any power conferred by or under this chapter, or to (sic)rant any injunction in respect of such order or action.by this amending act, the words 'notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force,' occurring in sub-section (1) of section 53a, were deleted. there can be no doubt that after the amendment of section 53d, the remedy prescribed by section ..... circumstances to terminate the petitioner's tenancy.7. two points have been urged before us on behalf of the petitioner : (i) that the notice terminating his tenancy and the order of eviction passed against him are bad because they are contrary to the provisions of section 53a of the act, and (ii) that chapter v-a of the act is unconstitutional as it offends against the guarantee contained, in article 14 of the constitution. we will consider these points in the same .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-15-1970
Reported in : AIR1971SC1348; (1970)3SCC147; [1971]2SCR611
..... , made an application praying for permission to withdraw from the petition 'for all purposes'. petitioner no. 2 objected to his withdrawal. the learned judge dismissed the application of petitioner no. 1 on the ground that section 110(1) of the representation of the people act, 1951, hereinafter called the 'act', dil not permit withdrawal by one petitioner without the consent of his co-petitioner. it has, however, been noted by the learned judge that both the petitioners continued ..... assembly of a state a person must be an elector for any assembly constituency in that state and he must not be subject to any of the disqualifications mentioned in section 16 of the act of 1950 or the disqualifications given in chapter iii of the act. the act of 1950 was meant to provide for the allocation of seats and the delimitation of constituencies for the purpose of elections to the house of the people and the legislatures of states, the qualifications of voters at such elections, the preparation of electoral rolls ... and matters connected therewith.7. part iii thereof contains provisions for ..... the election of respondent no. 1 b.d. jatti from the jamkhandi constituency at the general elections held in 1967.2. the last date for filing of nomination papers was january 19, 1967. the polling took place on february 2, 1967 and the result was declared on february 22, 1967. the only contesting candidates were respondent no. 1 and respondent no. 2 m.m. shivappa. respondent no. 1 secured 24,578 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jul-20-1970
Reported in : 1971CriLJ742
ORDERS.K. Ray, J.1. This is an application for quashing proceedings of the Certificate Officer of Boudh in Certificate Case No. III-8/65 in which bv order dated 10-4-67 the said Certificate Officer has found | the petitioner to be liable to be committed Under Section 478 Cr.PC for an offence Under Section 228 IPC. and that he has also committed contempt of court by casting aspersions on the Certificate Officer to his integrity and judiciousness.2. The background of this proceeding may be briefly stated. The petitioner is the Commercial Tax Officer. Ganjam II Circle, Bhanianagar. He assessed one Bhagaban Panda of Bhagiabahal to sales tax in exercise of his powers as Sales Tax Officer under the provisions of the Orissa Sales Tax Act of 1947. The assessee having defaulted to pay the tax, recourse was taken to certificate procedure under the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act for realisation of the same. The requisition was sent Under Section 4 of the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-12-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Delhi178
ORDER1. The petitioner, a resident of Bhiwani, Hissar District in the State of Haryana, has sought the following reliefs:1. That Section 4 and sub-section (b) (ii) of Section 7 and Sections 78, 79 and 80 of the Punjab Reorganization Act 1966 be declared as ultra virus and void. 2. That a suitable writ, order or direction may be issued to implement the Shah Commission Report in toto and that Chandigarh Capital Project as also Lalroo, Darabassi, Pathankot and areas of Gazilka and Malaut be declared as included in the territories of the Haryana State; and 3. That a suitable writ be issued ousting the authority of the Central Government from the conrol and management of the Bhakra Nangal complex and to vest the same in the State of Haryana in order that people of Haryana may have full share in the water of Satluj, Beas and Ravi rivers. 2. The Union of India and the State of Punjab, but not the State of Haryana, have filed returns constesting this petition.3. The two questions argued befor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-14-1970
Reported in : AIR1970SC2097; (1970)2SCC567; [1971]2SCR197
..... ) by any person who is neither the returned candidate nor one having acted with his connivance, if the result of the election has been materially affected. section 18(2) declares that for the purposes of this section the offences of bribery and undue influence at an election have the same meaning as in chapter ix-a of the indian penal code.39. we may here compare the provisions of section 18(1)(a) and section 18(1)(b)(i) read with section 18(2) with section 123 of the representation of the people act, 1951. this section lays down corrupt practices ..... . raghuveer singh : [1968]3scr246 ., in which a similar provision contained in section 33 of the representation of the people act, 1951, as amended by the amending act 27 of 1956, came up for consideration. prior to the amending act 27 of 1956, section 33, dealing with this subject, specifically laid down that any person, whose name is registered in the electoral roll of the constituency and who is not subject to any disqualification mentioned in section 16 of the representation of the people act, 1950, may subscribe as proposer or seconder as many nomination papers as there are vacancies to be filled, but no more; and there was also a consequential .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-15-1970
Reported in : AIR1971SC530; (1971)1SCC85; [1971]3SCR9
ORDERIn exercise of the power vested in him under Article 366(22) of the Constitution, the President hereby directs that with effect from the date of this Order His Highness Maharajdhiraja Madhav Rao Jiwaji Rao Scindia Bahadur do cease to be recognised as the Ruler of Gwalior. align='right'>By order and in the name of the President.Sd./-L. P. SINGHSecretary to the Government of India2. All these orders were notified together in the Gazette of India of September 19, 1970, Part II. They resulted in the forthwith stoppage of the Privy Purses received by the Rulers and the discontinuance of their personal privileges.3. These writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution were filed by some of the Rulers as test cases to question the orders. They ask for a writ, direction or order, declaring the Presidential Order to be unconstitutional, mala fide, ultra vires and void, and for quashing it, a writ, direction or order declaring that the several petitioners continue to be Rulers and thus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-16-1970
Reported in : (1970)2MLJ156
M. Natesan, J.1. This appeal has been placed before the Full Bench as the substantial question that calls for examination is the correctness of the view expressed by a Division Bench of this Court in Munahmnainatha Desikar v. Gopala I.L.R.(1943) Mad. 858 : (1943) 1 M.L.J. 434 about the applicability of the rule in Juttendramohun Tagore v. Ganendromohun Tagore (1872) 9 Beng. L.R. 377 : L.R. (1872) IndAp 47 to the office of manager of a South Indian temple under a scheme of succession settled by the founder. The very scheme of succession and right to management of the properties of the temple now in question was the subject-matter of adjudication in Manathunainatha Desikar v. Gopala (1943) 1 M.L.J. 434 : I.L.R.(1943) Mad. 858 and this aspect has given rise to a question of res judicata for consideration.2. The suit, the decree wherein in favour of the plaintiff has given rise to this appeal by the first defendant, is for a declaration that the first defendant is not entitled to be a join...
Tag this Judgment!