CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER & 4 v. MANOHAR SAHAI
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. This writ petition has been filed for declaring nomination accepted by Election Officer of respondent no. 5 to be invalid. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the election of 168 Choryasi constituency, Dist: Surat for which respondent no.5 has filed his nomination…
Judgment
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.SHAH ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================= VIJAYBHAI THAKORBHAI PATEL....Petitioner(s) Versus CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER & 4....Respondent(s) ========================================= Appearance: MR NK MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner. MR P.C.Kavina, Senior counsel with Mr. BIREN A VAISHNAV, ADVOCATE for Respondent nos. 1 to 4. ========================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.SHAH Date : 06/12/2012 C/SCA/16243/2012 JUDGEMENT ORAL JUDGEMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI)
We have heard Mr.N.K.Majmudar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.C.Kavina, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr.Biren Vaishnav appearing for respondent nos.1 to 4.
This writ petition has been filed for declaring nomination accepted by Election Officer of respondent no. 5 to be invalid. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the election of 168 Choryasi constituency, Dist: Surat for which respondent no.5 has filed his nomination wherein he has concealed details of his immovable property as well as not correctly stated his educational qualifications. In this regard, the petitioner has made a representation to the Chief Electoral Officer and prays this his representation be decided for cancellation of nomination of respondent no.5. In our opinion, such direction cannot be issued at this stage when the nomination has been filed, finalised and final list of candidates has been declared.
We do not find any merits in this petition. This petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. (V.M.SAHAI, J.) (S.G.SHAH, J.) VCDarji
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 06 Dec 2012. The bench was VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI, S G SHAH, VIJAY, V M SAHAI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.