PRAKASH KHANDRE Vs. VIJAYA KUMAR KHANDRE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KARNATAKA)
PRAKASH KHANDRE,BASWARAJ D.HONNA
VIJAYA KUMAR KHANDRE,PRAKASH KHANDRE
Click here to view full judgement.
SHAH, J. -
(1.)IN the background of facts briefly stated below, questions for determination in these appeals are -
1. IN an Election Petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), when contest for election to the post of MLA is by more than two candidates for one seat and a candidate, who was disqualified to contest the election, is elected - whether the Court can declare a candidate who has secured next higher votes as elected? And
(2.)WHETHER contract between the elected candidate and the Government was subsisting on the date of scrutiny of nomination papers?
2. Appellant Prakash Khandre contested election from No. 2-Bhalki Constituency of Karnataka State Legislative Assembly and was declared elected. Respondent No. 1 Dr. Vijay Kumar Khandre contested the said election but was defeated. The details of the votes secured by each candidate are as follows :-
Sl.No.Name of the CandidateNo. of Votes PolledDifference
01.Shri Prakash Khandre47,132
02.Dr. Vijay Kumar Khandre36,80510327
03.Sri Bheemanna Kolle660
04.Shri Shivaraj Patil1,054
05.Sri Siddaramaiah S. Swamy177
Respondent No. 1 challenged the said election by filing Election Petition No. 25/99 and contended that declaration of election dated 5-9-1999 resulting in favour of the appellant was illegal and void. He prayed that he may be declared as duly elected to Karnataka State Legislative Assembly on the ground that under S. 9-A of the Act, appellant was disqualified to contest the election as there were subsisting contracts entered into by him in the course of his business with the State Government.
Further, a voter Mr. Baswaraj D. Honna appellant in C.A. No. 1455 of 2002 also filed Election Petition No. 30/90 for a declaration that election of Mr. Prakash Khandre was void under S. 100(1)(a) and Section 100(1)(d)(i) of the Act.
(3.)APPELLANT also filed Recrimination Petition under S. 97 of the Act praying that in the event of his election to the constituency being declared void, respondent No. 1 Dr. Vijay Kumar Khandre should not be declared as elected as he is guilty of corrupt practices as specified in S. 123 of the Act.
The High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore (Mr. Justice A. V. Srinivasa Reddy) by its judgment and order dated 21-12-2001 allowed the election petition filed by respondent No. 1 and the election of appellant was declared void under S. 100(1)(a) on the ground that work of effective improvement and asphalting of Halburga Bawgi-Kamtana road was continued to be carried out by Prakash Khandre even after purported closure of contract. With regard to the rest of the contract works, the High court held that contracts were terminated. The Court also declared that the votes polled by the elected candidate would become wasted and, therefore, Dr. Vijay Kumar Khandre who has secured the next highest number of valid votes has to be declared elected under S. 101 of the Act and was declared accordingly. That order is challenged by Prakash Khandre by filing Civil Appeals Nos. 2-3 of 2002. Civil Appeal No. 1455 of 2002 is filed by Basavaraj D. Honna.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.