T BHAGYA LAXMI Vs. RETURNING OFFICER-CUM-MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER
LAWS(APH)-2008-9-76
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on September 15,2008

T.BHAGYA LAXMI Appellant
VERSUS
RETURNING OFFICER-CUM-MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, MAHABUBNAGAR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

K VENKATACHALAM VS. A SWAMICKAN [REFERRED TO]
K PRABHAKARAN VS. P JAYARAJAN [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

JOBY GEORGE VS. THOMAS VARGHESE [LAWS(KER)-2012-4-194] [REFERRED TO]
AJITH KUMAR K R , VS. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES [LAWS(KER)-2018-5-10] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS writ petition has been filed by Smt. T. Bhagya Laxmi assailing the order dated 26. 02. 2007 passed in O. P. No. 66 of 2005 on the file of the Senior Civil judge-cum-Election Tribunal, Mahabubnagar, whereby and whereunder the learned senior Civil Judge dismissed the O. P. filed by the petitioner questioning the election of Smt. G. Laxmi Devi-5th respondent as member of Ward No. 30 of mahaboobnagar Municipality.
(2.)BACKGROUND facts of the case leading to filing of this writ petition by smt. T. Bhagya Laxmi, in brief, are: The writ petitioner and the 5th respondent contested in the elections held on 24. 09. 2005 for Member of Ward No. 30 of mahaboobnagar Municipality. The 5th respondent secured highest votes and consequently declared to have been elected as Member of Ward No. 30 of mahaboobnagar Municipality. The writ petitioner challenged the election of the 5th respondent on the ground that as on the date of her nomination, she incurred disqualification being a convict for the offences under Sections 323 r/w. 34 and 504 IPC in S. T. C. No. 166 of 1997 on the file of the Special Judicial Magistrate of Second Class, Mahaboobnagar. The 5th respondent came to be sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- on each count and the said conviction and sentence became final as there being no appeal preferred by her as on the date of her nomination. The 5th respondent filed counter contending that she preferred an appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed in S. T. C. No. 166 of 1997. It is further contended that the petitioner did not raise any objection at the time of filing nomination and thereby she could not be permitted to raise such an objection after announcing the result of the election. Before the election Tribunal, the petitioner got herself examined as PW. 1 and marked 10 documents as Exs. A1 to A10. Whereas, the respondents did not choose to adduce either ocular or documentary evidence on their behalf. The Election Tribunal, on considering the evidence brought on record and on hearing the counsel for the parties, came to the conclusion that the conviction of the 5th respondent for the offences under Sections 323 r/w. 34 and 504 IPC does not render her disqualified to contest in the election as Member of Ward No. 30 of Mahaboobnagar municipality and accordingly dismissed the O. P. 66 of 2005 by an order dated 26. 2. 2007. Assailing the order passed by the Election Tribunal, the petitioner filed this writ petition.
(3.)HEARD learned counsel appearing for the parties.
;


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