Civil No 8227 of 1982
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
Dr Abishek Singhvi A Subba Rao and AS Gauraya for the Petitioners
Girish Chandra and section Suri for the Respondents
855 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATHAK CJ
This petition under Article 32 of the Con stitution has been filed by two petitioners the Assam Rifles Multi purpose Co operative Society Limited and Major General AS Guraya AVSM Retd Vice Chairman of the said Co operative Society
It is stated in this petition that on the north eastern extremity of India between latitudes 27deg
N and 28deg
N and on both sides of longitude 97xE within the former Tirup District in the NEFA area now in Arunachal Pradesh lies substantial territory which is a part of India
It is claimed that Major General Guraya as Inspector General Assam Rifles prepared a programme for settling retired defence personnel specially of the Assam Rifles in that region and took preparator steps for effect ing such settlement
It is asserted that about two hundred retired personnel with their families journeyed to the region and settled there on the basis of a scheme approved by the Government of India
It is alleged that the scheme assured allotment of land grant of title deeds in respect of the allotted land facilities for movement by air to and from Mohanbari freedom to develop the allotted areas grant of advance by way of loans provision of marketing facili ties for disposal of surplus produce guaranteed supply of essential commodities and provision of the basic require ments of life for the purpose of encouraging the all round economic development of the area
The Co operative Society was formed with the object of ameliorating the conditions of the settlers and for improving their economic lot
The petitioners relied on correspondence exchanged between them and the authorities of the State Government and of the Central Government and prayed for directions from this Court to the respondents for grant of the reliefs indicated in the writ petition
Counter Affidavits have been filed by the Government of India
Most of the allegations made by the petitioners have been denied
It is asserted that funds have been set apart and basic facilities have been provided
It is alleged that land was not allotted to Major Gen Guraya as he did not belong to the Assam Rifles and the scheme for rehabilitation of retired personnel from that unit did not cover him
It is alleged that he has engineered this writ petition
We may mention at the very outset that Major General Guraya who appears in person before us has categorically stated that he is not interested any more in any personal allotment
The case was taken up by us on 20 February 1987 and after 856 hearing the parties we were satisfied that settlement and habitation in that region should be encouraged
The region constitutes part of Indian territory and is located on the Indian border with China and Burma
It is in the public interest and for the benefit of the public that settlement of Indian citizens should be encouraged in this area and the area should be suitably developed
In that view on 20 February 1987 we made an order directing the Central Gov ernment to nominate a competent authority of suitable status to examine the problem and to look into the scheme and after hearing the petitioners to report to the Central Government to enable it to make an appropriate order for redress of the grievances of the petitioners
Pursuant to the order of this Court a report was submitted by the present Director General Assam Rifles in which he noted the features of the original scheme set forth in NEFA Adm letter No PC 4263 of 1617 August 1963 and the approval with modifications of the Government of India in the Minis try of External Affairs thereto as well as the points raised by the Assam Rifles Ex servicemen before this Court and before the Director General Assam Rifles when he visit ed Vijayanagar for the purpose and in that report he has made a number of recommendations in support of the scheme to settle Assam Rifles Ex servicemen and to ensure that the various facilities and concessions originally promised to them are provided
We had directed in our order of 20 Febru ary 1987 that the final order should be made by the Govern ment of India after consideration of the report
It seems that the Government considered the recommendations at an inter Ministerial meeting held in the Home Ministry on 6 July 1987 and thereafter took the decision contained in Annexure III to the affidavit of Shri RK Tandon Deputy Secretary NE Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi
It appears that the Government has decided that the Assam Rifles Ex servicemen who have been allotted 10 11 acres of prime land per family in a valley should be provided with agricultural input facilities including animal husbandry fertilizers insecticides as well as horticultural support under the normal schemes run by the State Government that the State Government should be requested to issue specific letters in respect of each family to enable it to obtain loans from banks and other financial institutions that while free air lifts were not possible the State Government should be asked to find out whether the subsidised rate of Rs89 per flight per head could be further reduced and that in any event no charges be levied for abortive flights that while a full time doctor is already posted in Vijaynagar the State Government should be requested to post a mid wife to the Vijayanagar hospital and to arrange for periodical visits of a Gynaecologist that the State PWD be requested to undertake the repair of the suspension bridges forthwith 857 that the Multi purpose Co operative Society should apply to the State Government for recognition and that a meeting be called to sort out the difficulties in the disbursal of pension by the Department of Posts and that on issues such as grant of citizenship loans etc
the position indicated in the minutes of the inter Ministerial meeting held on 6 July 1987 should be maintained
The report of the present Director General Assam Rifles and the decisions taken by the Central Government thereupon have been considered by us in the light of the submissions made by the parties
The decisions of the Central Government placed before us refer to requests to be made to the State Government to provide some of the facilities required by the settlers
Reference has already been made to those matters earlier
More than sufficient time has passed and it is desirable to ascertain what action has been taken by the State Government pursuant to those requests of the Central Government
Certain supplementary directions are necessary from this Court and we make them now 1
The Central Government and the State Government should decide between them as to which of them will give loans to the settlers and to what extent
The Central Government should direct that the exist ing Post Office establishment be enlarged to handle dis bursement of pensions
The State Government should upgrade the existing middle school to the status of a high school and make ade quate provision for additional seats in the student hostel to absorb the corresponding increase in the number of stu dents resulting from such upgradation
The grant of domicile certificates should be consid ered in relation to the settlers at least in respect of the members of the petitioner society
The case will now be listed on 1 August 1989 before which date the respondent No 1 the Union of India and the respondent No 2 the State of Arunachal Pradesh will file affidavits indicating the action adopted by them pursuant to the decisions taken at the inter Ministerial meeting men tioned earlier and pursuant to the directions made by this Court in this Order


Summary:
After the poll the appellant was declared elected to the Madras Legislative Assembly
Respondent No 1 filed an election petition praying that it be declared that the election of the appellant was void
In the petition it was alleged that two of the candidates at the election accepted money paid to them by the appellant and his election agent to induce them to abandon the contest and they actually abandoned the contest
These two candidates were not made parties to the petition
The appellant applied to the Election Tribunal to dismiss the petition under section 903 Of the Representation of the People Act 1951 for non compliance with the provisions of section 82 of the Act on the ground that allegations of a corrupt practice were made against the two candidates and Respondent No 1 had failed to make them parties to the petition as required by section 82 Held that the acceptance of gratification is not a corrupt practice within the meaning of section 1231 Of the Act and consequently it could not be said that allegations of corrupt practice had been made against the two candidates
There was thus no non compliance with the provisions of section 82 and the election petition was not liable to be dismissed under section 903