MV IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT‘BILASPUR, CHHATTISGARH w. p. No.)")7o£ zoool PETITIONER Budh Ram Singh Kanwar Aged about years S/o Sri Ranjit Singh R/o village Baderimuda P.O.Gopalpur Tehsil, Katghora, Dist.Korba(Chhattisgarh) Candidate of Chhattigarhi Samaj Party in Legislative Assembly-24 Marwahi Versus 1. Ajit Jogi, S/o Aged about 55 years, a Candidate for Member of Leslave Assembly in Legislative Assembly-24 Marwahi, Chief Minister Of Chhatsrh,Raipur S 2. tate of Chhattisgarh through the concerned Seretary, Bilaspur 3. The State Electn Cmssioner, Govt. of Chhttisgarh, Raipur Returning Officer Legislative Assembly‘24 Marwahi, (Collector, Bilaspu Distt.Bilpur TIION UNDER ARLE 6/7 O? THEOTITUTION ?ET TIC 2222 'CNS OF INDIA FOR I O WRI N HE 'OE CIRT MDMHS, ’ UD.WTO ETC I LIKE. giti tiga c io omi a r) as SSUANCE F T I T NATURE IORARX, ANA QARRAN . OR KE Shri Satish Chan d ‘ petitioner . Drg.N.K. snukla, respondents . ' Heard on admissi )n. The matter cancer .nominaticn paper filed b: 1s rejection of on a. ticket of Chhattisg‘ The eleétion in question 24 Marwahi Legislative CA o'f the seat of this ‘conS‘ upon the res igna‘tion 'fen Uike who represented this present Assembly. In thJ election has been éeclarw paper was 31 . 1.2001 . submis‘s ion of nomination On lst February, 2001 nor‘ scrutinised. petitioner was rejectedo the rejection of the nom wrongly. It is W /.. writ petitioner further contention of the that rejection of his n result of conspiracy hat hed against his candidature writ petitioner was made 1 :a Verma for the Dy.A .G . , for the r the writ petitioner 1rhi Samaj Party. is in reSpect of ms tituency . Vaca ncy E/i tuency was caus e d iered by one RamdaYal cons tituency in the said vacated seat , v ad. / The last date for nination papers were The nomina1 :ion filed by the writ It is contended that .nation paper of the ination paper was a GRPRJ~FSI4r—4I99——20.000 . w, new ;1 arena?! ‘WWt‘WW Wane mm mmw ~ tam Before: 19.1.2001 Hon‘ble Mr'.Justice W A. Bhishak, CJ. XI-HC—22 @ mm,m,mmg{ again approa ched the State I Having failed to get any rel Election Officer, the Writ 1 approached the Election Comx m‘kiaving failed'to < /‘/XA those authorities, the petii writ petition under Article to decide as to the legalit: the nomination paper of the It may be stated thai :lection Officer. .ief from the State e titioner also miss ion of I ndia . ; ;et relief from :ioner has filed this 226 o£ the Constitution I of theerejection of 2 writ petitioner. : election in respect l of the said constituency is Shri Shukla re§ers t me Article 329 (b') of {me their taking place todayc Therefore, a prayer has beeh made that the result oi the election may also not be declaredn mm w fa IVI’} @‘01 mam mm mm mmmm?! WWW1§fgt€rW €Fwm inasmuch as he had come to know about this conSpixacy some time before the nominations were scrutinised; Shri sac. Verma, leaxned counsel for the gEtitioner, states that tlge writ petitioner mJi protested against the rejection first to the Returning Qfficer, shri Sunil Kujur. As he did um succeed in any relief. he ammviafiwn WW§WW %mm $€$§amRa%a it is a very serious matttr and should be i ofa in question exce Legislature the Constitution of India which states- "no election to e er House of Parliament it \ or torthe House or eitger House cf the tate shall be called by an election petition presented to such thority and in such \ manner as may be’ vided for by or under any law made by t appropriate Legislature." ‘It is submitted by Dre S h as regards election will election petition to be esented by the aggrieved p - partyn It is submitted there is no appeal provi d by the Representation of the People Act, 1951 inst the ordez‘ & Returning Officer accept or rejecting nomination i g paper. It is submission Dre Shukla that rejection of nomination on scrutiny is part of the election process. Any diSpute th election process has x ’l al dismte and it should o be decided only by the c etent. authority in an election petition to be fiiled by the aggrieved pers on . / pt u p o h kla that any dispute ave to be decided in an that ATi takes place after the be A/ will have to be decided only as an elect o p i According to thewpEtitionen there was conSpiracy to reject his ‘ nomination and, therefore, properly examined a J GRPEI»?S/3 I J ——1 /2(70 l ~50.000. ‘ _L It seems very Clea to me that the dispute “ d a a f e