BINODANAND SAH Vs. SHAKIL AHAMAD KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is alleging improper rejection of nomination under Section 100(1)(c) by the Returning Officer for the 64 Kadwa Legislative Assembly Constituency in the district of Katihar in the Assembly Election held in the year 2015 that the election petitioner is before this Court by invoking the provisions of Sections 80, 80A and 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(2.) The brief facts leading to the contest is that following a notification dated 09.09.2015 for holding the general election to the Legislative Assembly in the State of Bihar that the schedule was issued by the Election Commission of India and in so far as the election to the 64 Kadwa Legislative Assembly Constituency, Katihar is concerned, it is as follows:

(3.) The election petitioner filed his nomination on 13.10.2015 which according to him was complete in all respects containing all required information. According to the petitioner, the Returning Officer issued a check list on the receipt part of nomination paper with the note that Column 8 (iii) ([k) in Form 26 was blank and the petitioner had to file a fresh/revised affidavit by 3 P.M. on 15.10.2015 which is the last date for filing nomination. According to the petitioner, since there was no blank space in Column 8 (iii) ([k) of Form 26, the matter was explained to the Returning Officer who informed him that the matter would be considered on the date of scrutiny. According to the petitioner, on the date of scrutiny again the Returning Officer was made to understand that the defect was not correct and that the required information was present and thus there was no requirement of any fresh/revised affidavit in Form 26 which according to the petitioner, satisfied the Returning Officer, however, he later came to know that his nomination was rejected on grounds that the affidavit in Form 26 was incomplete. After raising objection before the Chief Electoral Officer as well as the Election Commission of India as against the rejection of nomination that he is before this Court.