Election laws-rejection of nomination papers
bastele
(Querist) 05 April 2015
This query is : Resolved
The query is related to rejection of nomination papers by the returning officer under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Municipal Council Election Rules 1966. Wherein the candidate inadvertently failed to pen down his signature in one of the designated blanks provided for the same. Apart from that he has signed all other blanks and has also furnished the requisite information within affidavit which is duly notarized. Now the point is can the rejection be challenged under Election Petition? Whether the returning officer has erred in rejection the above mentioned ground? any supreme court citation?? help aniticpated
Guest
(Expert) 05 April 2015
Incomplete form is subject to rejection.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 05 April 2015
sorry, citations are not supplied here.
I may inform that rejection of nomination papers depends on rules and regulations set by the election commission for each set of elections. So refer to the same.
bastele
(Querist) 05 April 2015
thanx a lot for replying sir,but sir, all the requisite information and documents are furnished...all other blanks meant for signature are also complied with apart from one single place, that too was without any ulterior motive. the place where he failed to pen down his signature was declaration regarding the three points like, "he does not holds any office of profit". but a detailed duly notarized affidavit mentioning those three points is submitted and it does have the signature of the candidate. Cant this be a mere technical error??
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 05 April 2015
This was material declaration and the rejection was rightly done.
bastele
(Querist) 05 April 2015
sorry sir, but then what about "audi alterm partem"?? cant he ask for opportunity to explain the lapse on his part? no remedy available in this secnario??
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 05 April 2015
I find no applicability of rule of ' audi laterm partem' in this case.
If you think that you have good merit then file election petition. i have already commented to what I can.
bastele
(Querist) 05 April 2015
sir, i am just a student, was curious so raised another query, by no means i meant to offend you or rebut you. thanx for the information i really appreciate your inputs sir :)
Guest
(Expert) 05 April 2015
So, it was an academic query from a student. By the way, on what ground you want to apply the principle of "audi alterm partem"?
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 05 April 2015
In complete application remains incomplete when it came before the RO. There is no need to seek explanation for the same.
bastele
(Querist) 05 April 2015
thank you sir,i was invoking the principle of audi alteram partem on the grounds that, the RO after assessing the nomination form, at the time of scrutiny could have pointed out the lacunae in the form to the candidate and would have given an opportunity to him to pen down the signature. and further more,the theory of presumption regarding the validity of the nomination papers mentioned in handbook of the Returning Officer. can these two grounds substantiate the contentions of the candidate?? please correct me if i am wrong
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 06 April 2015
do you have any piece of law/instructions/circular/order etc whereby RO is obliged to do what you propose.
How the RO can be expected to act as your Munshi and have papers filled from you.
Guest
(Expert) 06 April 2015
You are vainly trying to to fit the principle of "audi alterm partem" in your case, like a square peg in the round hole.
