TRILOKI SINGH Vs. RETURNING OFFICER LUCKNOW
LAWS(ALL)-1955-3-10
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (AT: LUCKNOW)
Decided on March 04,1955

TRILOKI SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
RETURNING OFFICER LUCKNOW Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) SRI Triloki Singh was a candidate for election to Lok Sabha from the Lucknow District Central constituency. The two other candidates were Srimati Sheorajvati Nehru and Sri Atal Behari bajpai. All the processes of the election took place up to 27-2-1955. Thereafter the counting of votes commenced from 1-3-1955. Tin's petition was filed on 2-3-1955 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for certain directions to to be issued and for a declaration to be made that the counting of votes on 1-3-1955 was invalid and inoperative in law. The direction that was asked for was to the effect that the Returning Officer should be prohibited from following the result of, what is called, his "illegal procedure" in counting votes and should not prepare and certify the return in form No. XVI and should not cause it to be published in the gazette. An interim order for the sealing of necessary papers was also prayed for but that order was not issued and must now be left out of consideration.
(2.) THE question that first of all is to be considered, on a preliminary objection being raised on behalf of the Returning Officer, is whether this Court has jurisdiction to issue a writ in this matter which relates to an election, even supposing all the allegations made in the application to be correct, though this is not accepted by the Returning Officer. The question of law which has, therefore, arisen is whether I can exercise the powers of the High court under Article 226 of the Constitution arid issue a writ either of certiorari or of mandamus in respect of the action of the Returning Officer.
(3.) THE matter is governed by authorities. The first decision is a decision of a Bench of this Court of which I Was a member. In, that decision it has been laid down that Article 329, Clause (b) of the Constitution prevents an interference by the High Court by the issue of a writ in all matters relating to an election. It was further held that the word "election" as used in that Article is wide enough to cover" every part of the process of selection of a representative. It was, therefore, held that this Court could not issue a writ in the matter of the proper or improper rejection of a nomination paper.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.