SHRI DAULAT RAM SANKHYAN Vs. SHRI KULDIP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Daulat Ram Sankhyan, erstwhile Deputy Minister Agriculture, Himachal Pradesh, having lost in the Assembly election of 1972 from Kot Kehloor constituency, has filed this election petition under Ss. 81 - 83 of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) for setting aside the election of the Respondent Shri Kuldip Singh who has been declared elected from this constituency. The allegations made in the petition may now be briefly stated.

(2.) A notification calling upon the voters of the Constituency No. 20, namely, Kot Kehloor in the District of Bilaspur was made on 31st January, 1972 to return a candidate to the Legislative Assembly of Himachal Pradesh. The dates for filing the nomination papers were between 1st to 8th February, 1972. The scrutiny was held on 9th February, 1972 and withdrawal of candidates was allowed up to 11th of February, 1972. The polling in the constituency was held on 5th of March, 1972. Thereafter the counting took place on 11th of March, 1972 and the results were declared. There were six candidates who had contested the election and amongst them Kuldip Singh, Respondent who belongs to Congress, polled the highest number of votes. He defeated his closest rival Daulat Ram Sankhyan by 695 votes. According to the Petitioner, the election of the Respondent Kuldip Singh is void on a variety of grounds. He submitted that Kuldip Singh was not qualified or was disqualified, to be chosen to fill the seat, under the Constitution of India and under the provisions of the Act, inasmuch as, there subsisted two contracts entered into by him in the course of his trade or business with the State of Himachal Pradesh for the execution of works which he described as a contract in partnership with one Rikhi Ram for clearance of dry cheel forest in Jhola Forest Division and a contract of construction work which he described as " a building in open air Jail at Bilaspur ,, As regards the first contract, the allegation was that he had applied for transfer of his interest in such contract in favour of his son Pradeep Singh which transfer was not validly effected inasmuch as Pradeep Singh is only 22 years of age and is a student. He had no funds of his own, nor any ostensible source of income. As such the real interest was of the Respondent himself. According to the Petitioner the Respondent constitutes a joint Hindu family with Pradeep Singh. As to the second contract it was averred, that a dispute existed regarding wages payable to the labour employed on the works. The security deposited by Kuldip Singh was not refunded as the labourers have not been paid as yet. In this manner the two contracts were stated to be subsisting and as such the Respondent, according to the Petitioner, was not qualified to stand in the election.

(3.) The Petitioner contended that one Hari Singh, vice -President of Bhakhra Panchayat along with 13 or 14 others was accused of criminally removing the goods of a dispensary situate in village Saloha. A police case regarding that offence was pending in the Court of the Magistrate First Class Bilaspur. On the night between 17th and 18th February, 1972, Dr. Y.S. Parmar, the Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh came and stayed at the Circuit House of Bilaspur. Hari Singh was called to meet the Chief Minister at that time. Shri Kuldip Singh complained that Hari Singh was not working in favour of the Congress, and the latter was asked by Dr. Parmar that he would make an order for withdrawal of the police case against him. Hari Singh further wanted the dispensary at Saloha to be shifted to his village Makri. The order for the shifting of the dispensary was made on the very next day. The prosecution case was withdrawn on a day subsequent to the election. In this manner, according to the Petitioner, Hari Singh was bribed by the Chief Minister who was an agent of Kuldip Singh in furtherance of the election prospects of the Respondent.