BOSE - (1.) THE judgement of the court was delivered by ::
(2.) THIS is an appeal against a decision of the Nagpur Election 'Trbunal. The contest before the tribunal was about two seats in the Bhandara Parliamentary Constituency. The elections were held on five days 'in December, 1951, and January, 1952. Thirteen candidates filed nomination papers, among them the petitioner. Of these, six contested the seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes. -One of these was Gangaram Thaware who has since died. The Scheduled Caste in question is the Mahar caste. Objection was taken to Thaware's nomination for the reserved seat on the ground that he was not a Mahar. It is admitted that he was born a Mahar, but later in life he joined the Mahanubhava Panth. This, according to the appellant, is a sect which does not believe in caste, and alternatively that it forms a separate caste in itself The contention was that when Gangaram Thaware joined the Panth he ceased to be a member of the Mahar caste' The objection succeeded and his nomination was rejected. The nomination of another Scheduled Caste candidate was also rejected and five others were withdrawn before the election, among them was the present petitioner. That left six candidates of whom three were eligible for the reserved seat. The two who were elected were Tularam Sakhare, for the Scheduled Caste seat, and chaturbhuj, Jasani, nor the general seat. Jasani's election was challenged on the ground that he was subject to the disqualifications set out in section 7 (d) of the Representation of the People Act (Act XLIII of 1951) as he was interested in a contract for the supply of goods to the central government.
(3.) THE Election tribunal held that the rejection of Gangaram Thaware's nomination was improper as he continued to be a member of the Mahar caste despite his conversion to the tenets of the Mahanubhava Panth. It also held that Chaturbhuj Jasani had a contract with the central government, so he was disqualified. Accordingly it set aside the whole election. We will deal with Chaturbhuj Jasani's election first. Section 7(d) is in these terms : 'A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, -and for being, a member etc. * * * * (d)if by himself he has any share or interest in a contract for the supply of goods to the appropriate government.' Chaturbhuj Jasani was, and still is, a partner in the firm of Moolji Sicka and Company, and it is said that at all material times the firm had a contract for the supply of bidis to the government for the troops. Moolji Sicka and Company is a firm of bidi manufacturers. The central government was interested in stocking and purchasing bidis for sale to its troops through its canteens. Accordingly, it placed two of the brands of bidis manufactured by this firm on its approved list and entered into an arrangement with the firm under which the firm was to sell, and the government was to buy from the firm, from time to time, these two brands of bidis. It was argued that this amounted to a contract for the supply of goods within the meaning of the section. It was said that the contract was embodied in four letters. ;