Case Note & Summary
The case involves three writ petitions filed by candidates whose nomination forms for the election to Nimdari Grampanchayat, scheduled for 19th June 2005, were rejected by the Returning Officer. The sole ground for rejection was that in the column for the name of the ward, the candidates had written the ward number but not the ward name. The petitioners argued that the ward name was not known to them and that the defect was not of a substantial character. They relied on Rule 11(2A) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Election Rules, 1959, which prohibits the rejection of nomination papers on grounds of defects that are not of a substantial character. The court, after hearing the counsel, found that the omission to mention the ward name while mentioning the ward number was a technical defect that did not affect the substance of the nomination. The court also noted that the Returning Officer's action appeared to benefit a rival group. The court allowed the petitions, set aside the rejection orders, and directed the Returning Officer to accept the nomination forms and proceed with the election process. The court emphasized that the Returning Officer should not reject nomination papers for trivial or non-substantial defects.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Nomination Paper - Rejection - Defect of Substantial Character - Rule 11(2A) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Election Rules, 1959 - The petitioners' nomination forms were rejected because they mentioned the ward number but not the ward name. The court held that this was not a defect of substantial character and the Returning Officer ought not to have rejected the nomination papers. The court relied on the principle that technical defects which do not affect the substance of the nomination should not lead to rejection. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rejection of nomination forms on the ground that the name of the ward was not mentioned, though the ward number was mentioned, constitutes a defect of substantial character under Rule 11(2A) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Election Rules, 1959.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the orders of rejection, and directed the Returning Officer to accept the nomination forms of the petitioners and proceed with the election process.
Law Points
- Nomination paper cannot be rejected for defect not of substantial character
- Returning Officer must consider substantial character of defect
- Rule 11(2A) of Bombay Village Panchayats Election Rules
- 1959
