Decided on December 05,1979



N.H.BHATT - (1.) This is a petition by one-time member of the Surat Municipal School Board. He was duly elected to that post and so was elected the respondent no. 2 Mr. S. K. Trivedi. November 1 1976 was the day fixed for filing the nomination papers for the post of the Chairman of the Board. The Chairman is elected by the members of the school. Board. There were two candidates for that post one was the petitioner and the other was the respondent no. 2. The nomination papers were also duly filled in. The petitioner handed over his nomination papers to the Chair- man of the meeting via one Manikant Dahyabhai who was sitting next to the petitioner in the said meeting whereas the respondent no. 2 placed his nomination papers directly into the hands of the Chairman. The peti- tioners nomination papers were rejected only on the ground that the petitioner had not delivered his nomination papers to the Chairman of the meeting. In the affidavit-in-reply at the admission stage an additional ground was taken to the effect that the petitioners supporter Manikant Dahyabhai who was also a member had signed the papers as Manikant Dahyabhai Parmar and not Manikant Dahyabhai Munim.
(2.) The petitioners grievance appears to be highly well-based. When he personally delivered the nomination papers through his supporter wrong deciphering of the signature of the petitioners supporter by the Chairman was not a ground to reject his nomination papers. Similarly the law that is Rule 12 of the Bombay Primary Education Rules 1949 does not require that between the candidate delivering the nomination papers and the Chair- man receiving the same there should be no other human hand. All that Rule 12 of the said Rules requires is that the candidates have to deliver their nomination papers to the Chairman. Suppose a Peon is standing by the Chairman and a member sitting on the chair with the intention to deliver the nomination papers physically places the nomination papers in the hands of the Peon who in turn hands them over to the Chairman. Would it not be delivery of the nomination papers by the candidate to the Chairman? The people who adopt such stances and attitude have made the law the ass which it is not. The petitioners petition was there- fore entitled to succeed but on the technical ground I am constrained to reject the same.
(3.) The election of the Chairman is made for the period of three years because the life of the Board itself is for three years under Rule 10-A of The Bombay Primary Education Rules 1949 The period of more than 3 years has elapsed since November 1 1976 and therefore the petition has become totally infructuous. On this ground I dispose of this petition as infructuous and discharge the Rule with no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.