Kamleshwar Nath, J. - (1.) BY a notification dated 20th November, 1984 of the President of India, under Section 14 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (For short, the Act,) the electors of "25 - -Amethi Parliamentary Constituency" (District Sultanpur) were called upon to elect members for the House of People (Lok Sabha). The Petitioner and all the Respondents were candidates at the election. As a result of the poll, Respondent No. 1 Sri Rajiv Gandhi, was declared elected. On 12 -2 -1985 the present Petitioner filed an election petition, under Section 80 of the Act, for a declaration that the election of Respondent No. 1, as aforesaid, is void under Section 100(1)(a) and Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Act. There is also a prayer to disqualify the Respondent No. 1 for a period of 6 years for committing corrupt practices under Section 123 of the Act and also to declare Section 80 to be ultra vires.
(2.) THE election petition had come up for disposal before me under Section 80 -A(2) of the Act. Notices were issued to the Respondent No. 1 only and appearance has been put on his behalf. This order governs C.M.A. No. 15 (E) -198 filed by the Respondent No. 1 to strike out paras 8 to 19 of the election petition under Order 6 Rule 16 Code of Civil Procedure and to dismiss/reject the election petition as not disclosing a cause of action. C M. Application No. 32 (E) of 1985 is the application of the Petitioner in reply with a prayer to dismiss C.M. Application No. 15 (E) of 1985 and to direct the Respondent No. 1 to file his written statement. Stated plainly and briefly, the Petitioner's case is that the election of Respondent No. 1, is void under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Act on account of improper oath administered by the Returning Officer to candidates at the time of nomination, under Article 84(a) of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as the Returning Officer remained silting in his chair and did not stand up while administering oath. It was next urged that the Respondent No. 1 had committed corrupt practice under Section 100(b) read with Section 123 of the Act, of bribery, undue influence upon the electors, and of the use of the machinery of government, namely, the Returning Officer, the Assistant Returning Officer and Police personnel, for furtherance of his prospect candidate.
(3.) IN the petition, under Order 6 Rule 16 Code of Civil Procedure, it has been urged on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 that the Petitioner has not set forth a concise statement of the material facts and allegations pertaining Section 100(1)(d)(iv) and Section 100(1)(b), read with Section 123 of the Act, nor has set forth the necessary particulars regarding the corrupt practices. In reply, the Petitioner has reiterated that the necessary statement of material facts and particulars have been made.;