MADAN MOHAN Vs. ARUN SHOURIE
LAWS(ALL)-2010-1-82
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on
January 22,2010
MADAN MOHAN
Appellant
VERSUS
ARUN SHOURIE
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
DURGA SHANKAR MEHTA VS. RAGHURAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]PRATAP SINGH VS. KRISHNA GUPTA [REFERRED TO]
MURARKA RADBEY SHYAM KAM KUMAR VS. ROOP SINGH RATHORE [REFERRED TO]
SUBBARAO VS. MEMBER ELECTION TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
RAJ NARAIN VS. INDIRA NEHRU GANDHI [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. RAMDAS SHRINIVAS NAYAK [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH J P GOYAL BISHAMBHAR NATH PANDE VS. USHA RANI:RAJ NARAIN:RAJ NARAIN [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR JOSHI VS. NITIN BHAURAO PATIL [REFERRED TO]
RAFIQ KHAN VS. LAXMI NARAYAN SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
H D REVANNA VS. G PUTTASWAMY GOWDA [REFERRED TO]
T M JACOB VS. C POULOSE [REFERRED TO]
R P MOIDUTTY VS. P T KUNJU MOHAMMAD [REFERRED TO]
JEET MOHINDER SINGH VS. HARMINDER SINGH JASSI [REFERRED TO]
V NARAYANASWAMY VS. C P THIRUNAVUKKARASU [REFERRED TO]
V NARAYANASWAMY VS. C P THIRUNAVUKKARASU [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDER SINGH VS. JANMEJA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
MULAUAM SINGH YADAV VS. DHARAMPAL YADAV [REFERRED TO]
T PHUNZATHANG VS. HANGKHANLIAN [REFERRED TO]
HARI SHANKER JAIN VS. SONIA GANDHI [REFERRED TO]
MICHAEL B FERNANDES VS. C K JAFFER SHARIEF [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRASAD SHARMA VS. MANI KUMAR SUBBA [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRASAD SHARMA VS. MANI KUMAR SUBBA [REFERRED TO]
PEOPLES UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ROOP KUMAR VS. MOHAN THEDANI [REFERRED TO]
BIDESH SINGH VS. MADHU SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAM BALI VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SARDAR HARCHARAN SINGH BRAR VS. SUKH DARSHAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAKANT UTTAM CHODANKAR VS. DAYANAND RAYU MANDRAKAR [REFERRED TO]
ANIL BALUNI VS. SURENDRA SINGH NEGI [REFERRED TO]
BALDEV SINGH VS. SHINDER PAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
C/M INTER. COLLEGE KORARI LACHHAN SHAH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-4-40] [REFERRED TO]GIRJA SINGH VS. COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT INTERMEDIATE COLLEGE [LAWS(ALL)-2022-6-24] [REFERRED TO]
JALAGAM VENKAT RAO VS. VANAMA VENKATESWARA RAO [LAWS(TLNG)-2023-7-29] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Instant election petition has been filed challenging the result of biennial election of Rajya Sabha/Council of State, which was declared on 26.6.2004.
The present Election petition was filed on 13.07.2004. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for nomination of Bench and in turn thereof, Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K. Mehrotra was nominated. Subsequently, Hon'ble Mr. Justice O.P. Srivastava was nominated and thereafter Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shri Narayan Shukla was nominated to deal with the matter but later on His Lordship released the case and in turn this Bench has been nominated by the Hon'ble Chief Justice.
(2.)At the very threshold of arguments, Shri S.N. Shukla learned Counsel for the election petitioner had not pressed the relief with regard to the validity/vires of amended provision contained in Section 3 of the Representation of Peoples Act, hence, question with regard to validity of amended Section 3 of the Representation of Peoples Act is not dealt with.
(3.)The election petitioner, Mr. Madan Mohan, whose nomination as Congress candidate was rejected by the returning officer, has challenged the election of respondents 1 to 11. They have been elected for Council of States (Rajya Sabha) by the elected members of the U.P. Legislative Assembly, notified by Election Commission of India under Section 39 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RP Act/RPA') vide notification dated 4.6.2004, as amended by subsequent notifications dated 10.6.2004 and 23.6.2004, the result of which was declared on 26.6.2004.
The present Election petition was filed on 13.07.2004. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for nomination of Bench and in turn thereof, Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K. Mehrotra was nominated. Subsequently, Hon'ble Mr. Justice O.P. Srivastava was nominated and thereafter Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shri Narayan Shukla was nominated to deal with the matter but later on His Lordship released the case and in turn this Bench has been nominated by the Hon'ble Chief Justice.
(2.)At the very threshold of arguments, Shri S.N. Shukla learned Counsel for the election petitioner had not pressed the relief with regard to the validity/vires of amended provision contained in Section 3 of the Representation of Peoples Act, hence, question with regard to validity of amended Section 3 of the Representation of Peoples Act is not dealt with.
(3.)The election petitioner, Mr. Madan Mohan, whose nomination as Congress candidate was rejected by the returning officer, has challenged the election of respondents 1 to 11. They have been elected for Council of States (Rajya Sabha) by the elected members of the U.P. Legislative Assembly, notified by Election Commission of India under Section 39 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RP Act/RPA') vide notification dated 4.6.2004, as amended by subsequent notifications dated 10.6.2004 and 23.6.2004, the result of which was declared on 26.6.2004.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.