GULSHER AHMED Vs. ELECTION TRIBUNAL, CHHATARPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India directed against an order passed by the Election Tribunal, Chhatarpur in election petition No. 114 of 1957, on 26th August 1957.

(2.) THE election out of which the election -petition arose was to the legislative assembly of Madhya Pradesh from Amarpatan constituency. The tenth respondent Shri Lal Behari Singh was a candidate but he retired from the contest under Section 55 -A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter the Act) on 19th February 1957. At the election Shri Ram Hit Gupta, the second respondent, was declared elected on 6th March 1957. The petitioner, Shri Gulsher Ahmed, was also a candidate, and [he filed the election -petition challenging the election of Shri Ram Hit Gupta. In his petition he did not join Shri Lal Behari Singh. Before the Election Commissioner a contention was raised that the petition was liable to be dismissed in view of the non -joinder of Shri Lal Behari Singh. The Election Commissioner at first fixed the case, for consideration of this objection, but later, left the matter open for the decision of the Election Tribunal and did not express any opinion. When the petition came before the Election Tribunal, the preliminary objection was taken up for consideration at the instance of Shri Ram Hit Gupta. It may be mentioned that Shri Lal Behari Singh appeared and filed an application for being made a respondent to which the petitioner made no objection and thus Shri Lal Behari Singh came to be made a party to the dispute.

(3.) THE aggrieved petitioner did not file an appeal under Section 116 -A of the Act. He presented a petition purporting to be under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for getting the order of the Election Tribunal quashed. At the hearing, a preliminary objection was taken that the petition was incompetent because an adequate statutory remedy was available to the petitioner. We heard arguments on this objection -and announced to the parties our opinion that the objection must be sustained. We stated at the time that the detailed reasons would be given later, and we do so now. We also agreed not to dismiss the petition there and then but to defer it for two days, while our reasons were being prepared.