S.K.Sen, C.J. - (1.) Heard Shri M. D. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners.
(2.) The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the election on two grounds. Firstly, that voter's name was included in two wards and secondly, the candidate was not duly qualified since he was below age. Both the grounds are covered by our judgment wherein it has been held that election petition is appropriate remedy. So far as the first ground is concerned, we have already held today in Writ Petition No. 53873 of 2000 that the petitioner has an equally efficacious and speedy alternative remedy by way of filing an election petition. So far as other ground is concerned, Section 19C provides as follows : "19(c) that such person was not qualified to be nominated as a candidate for election or that the nomination paper of the petitioner was improperly rejected."
(3.) It has been averred that under Section 13D, disqualification has been prescribed. Since the elected member is below age he is disqualified. That amounts to the fact that nomination paper should not have been accepted and that is covered under Section 19C. Under Section 19C, he is to file election petition. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that election petition is appropriate remedy and writ petition does not lie.;