Mahesh Grover, J. - (1.) C.M. No. 3818 of 2016 Allowed. The case is taken up for hearing today. Main Case The appellant herein filed C.W.P. No. 17881 of 2016 impugning the order of respondent No.3 affirmed by respondent No.2 vide which his nomination for the election amongst the graduate constituency for the Senate Elections of the Panjab university to be held on 25.9.2016 was rejected on the ground that he had furnished incorrect information about his residential address.
(2.) The learned Single Judge dismissed the plea on the ground that he would have the remedy of challenging the election before an appropriate forum by resorting to the relevant provisions of law.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the impugned orders before the Writ Court passed by respondent No.3 and affirmed by respondent No.2 in appeal were in exercise of the powers under Regulation 5(B)(iii) of the Panjab university Calendar, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Calendar) which does not contemplate or empower the authorities to reject the nomination paper as invalid in view of the separate provision governing such a course. He refers to Regulation 17 (VI) of the Calendar to contend that furnishing incorrect information regarding the address is not covered thereunder. For the purpose of reference, Regulation 5(B) (iii) and Regulation 17(VI) are extracted here below:- "5. REGISTRATIN OF GRADUATES : xxx xxx xxx B.(iii) A candidate shall enter his ordinary place of residence or business in his application form. The place of residence would mean : (a) Where he owns immovable property ; or (b) Where he resides permanently, or (c) Where he works. If the case of candidate falls under more than one of the above three clauses (a),(b) and (c), he shall be required to choose one of these places and shall make a declaration to that effect while filing the nomination papers and only the place so chosen by him, shall be treated as the 'place of his residence'. Subsequent change, if any, in his ordinary place of residence or business, shall be communicated to the Registrar, by the date prescribed, and on the prescribed form obtainable from the Registrar's office. The place of residence or business or change in such place communicated to the Registrar is liable to be rejected by him if found incorrect after necessary scrutiny and verification or if it is not filed by the prescribed date." xxx xxx xxx 17(VI) A nomination paper shall be declared invalid:- (a) If a proposer or a seconder has signed nomination papers of more candidates than the number of vacancies; (b) If the nomination paper is not signed by the candidate or by the proposer or by the seconder; (c) If the nomination paper is not addressed to the Returning Officer by name, and does not reach him under a registered cover, or is not delivered to him personally, by the date and hour notified under clause (i). (d) In the case of an election by the Registered Graduates:- (1) If the candidate or his proposer or seconder is a defaulter on the date of publication of the final Register of Graduates; and/or (2) In the sum of Rs. 500 required to be deposited by the candidate under clause (iv) is not received in the office by the prescribed date and hour ; (3) If it does not bear the Registered Graduate enrolment number or the serial number of the candidate, the proposer and the seconder or, if Register Graduate enrolment number of the serial number of anyone of them happens to be wrong. (e) If the candidate has ceased to hold the requisite qualification or capacity by virtue of which he is seeking election." Learned counsel for the appellant also made a reference to certain other candidates who were similarly placed as the appellant who were granted the permission to contest the elections. He has mentioned these names in para-17 of the writ petition that he preferred. He also tried to make out a cause of discrimination by filing an additional affidavit regarding certain other people namely the candidate at Sr. No. 8 Prabhjit Singh. Apart from this, it is contended that once the appellant's name found mention in the voters list, it could not be deleted. A reference in this regard has been made to Regulation 13.3 of the Calendar which is extracted here below:- "13.3. A voter's name shall not be removed from the Register of Voters for the reason that the voter has, subsequent to the publication of the final Register, ceased to hold the capacity in which he was registered as such.";