Election Laws – Chhattisgarh Panchayats (Election Petitions, Corrupt Practices and Disqualification for Membership) Rules, 1995 – r.6 – Relief that may be claimed by the petitioner –Election of Sarpanch – Election petition filed before the Sub Divisional Officer u/s. 122 seeking relief of recounting of votes alone, without seeking any relief u/r. 6 – Maintainability of:
Held : Where a right or a liability is created by a statue, which gives a special remedy for enforcing it, the remedy provided by the statue must be availed of – Furthermore, if a Statue provides for doing a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner – s. 122 provides that an election under the said Act could be called in question only by a petition presented in the prescribed manner – Manner prescribed is in the Rules of 1995 – In r. 6, it has been provided that the petitioner may claim a declaration that the election of all or any of the returned candidates is void; and in addition, thereto a further declaration that he himself or any other candidate has been duly elected – In view of thereof, in the Election Petition filed u/s. 122, the reliefs claimed have to be in consonance with the r. 6 – The court or tribunal may direct re-counting of votes in the Election Petition, depending upon the evidence laid down by the parties in the Election Petition – Petitioner having failed to make any application in writing for recounting of votes as required u/s. 80 of the 1995 Act, and having failed to seek relief of declarations as required u/r. 6, the Election Petition filed by the petitioner before the Sub Divisional Officer seeking relief of re-counting of votes alone was not maintainable – Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 – Chhattisgarh Panchayat Nirvachan Niyam, 1995. [Para 13 and 15] Election laws: Statutory provisions relating to election law – Interpretation of:
Held: Jurisprudence on the subject mandates strict construction of the provisions – Election contest is not an action at law or a suit in equity but purely a statutory proceeding, provision for which has to be strictly construed. [Para 15]
LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
Sohan Lal vs. Babu Gandhi and Others (2003) 1 SCC 108 : [2002]
4 Suppl. SCR 333 – relied on.
Ram Rati vs. Saroj Devi and Others (1997) 6 SCC 66 : [1997] 3 SCR 1050; Cherukuri Mani w/o Narendra Chowdari vs. Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others (2015) 13 SCC 722 : [2014] 6 SCR 750; Laxmi Singh and Others vs. Rekha Singh and others (2020) 6 SCC 812 – referred to.
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.