Every voter has a right to know the educational qualification of a candidate

Must Read

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract....

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish...

Follow us

CASE:

Mairembam Prithviraj v. Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh, (2017) 2 SCC 487

 

FACTS:

Both the appellant and defendant had contested the Manipur Legislative Assembly elections from the Moirang constituency in 2012 polls. The appellant, who contested on a Nationalist Congress Party ticket, won the election. However, it was declared void by the High Court of Manipur, which was challenged before the Supreme Court.

 

ISSUES:

The court considered the question that whether it was necessary to plead and prove that the result was materially affected when the nomination of the returned candidate was found to have been improperly accepted, moreover, when there are only two candidates contesting the election.

 

ARGUMENTS:

The appellant had, in his nomination papers, declared that he was a Masters in Business Administration from Mysore University. Punkhrem Sharatchandra, the defendant, filed an election petition before the Guwahati high Court, stating that the appellant had falsely claimed that he was an MBA and moreover the same declaration was made by the appellant in 2008 assembly as well. The appellant however stated that it was a mere “clerical error”.

 

HELD:

A bench consisting of Justices A R Dave and L Nageswara Rao stated that Every voter has a fundamental right to know the educational qualification of a candidate contesting elections. The provisions of the Representation of the People Act 1951, Rules and Form 26 casts a duty on the candidates to give correct information about their educational qualifications. The court stated that even  if there are only two candidates contesting and it is proved that one of the  candidate’s nomination papers have been “improperly accepted”, then the one who has  lost the poll doesn’t need to produce prove that the election has been materially affected. The appellant’s plea that it was a “clerical error” cannot be accepted as it wasn’t committed once but he has been making the statement that he has an MBA degree, since 2008. The bench also allowed the plea of the defendant that now he should be declared the winner as the election of the other candidate has been declared void.

 

LEARNING OUTCOME:

It is the fundamental right of the voters to know the academic qualification of a candidate contesting elections and any false declaration on this count could lead to rejection of nomination papers.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board & Anr., via video-conferencing. Deeming the...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish Bisht & Anr. v. State...

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against National Stock Exchange For Lack Of Merit

In the case of A. Kumar v. Financial Intelligence Unit & Ors., A. Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...

The Federal Appeals Court Holds Trump’s Diversion of Military Funds To Build the Wall To Be Unlawful

The Federal Appeals Court held that US President Donald Trump’s diversion of military funds to build the wall is unlawful. A grey area in the...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Filed Challenging the Judgment of Madras High Court in Ganesan v. State Represented by Its Inspector of Police

An appeal was filed before the Supreme court, challenging the judgment & order of Madras High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the HC judgment...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -