Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Only Remedy - Post-Election Remedy for Rejected Nominations: Telangana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Telangana High Court today dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of nomination papers for the State Assembly elections from the 61-Jubilee Hills Constituency. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar, upheld the principle that legal recourse for rejected nominations is available only through election petitions post-election, as per the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

The petitioners, residents of Hyderabad, had their nomination papers rejected on November 13, 2023, by the Returning Officer. Contesting this decision, they approached the High Court seeking judicial intervention. However, the court, in its order, highlighted the constitutional bar to interference in electoral matters, specifically referencing Article 329(b) of the Constitution of India.

Chief Justice Alok Aradhe, in his observation, noted, "Under the election law, the only significance which the rejection of a nomination paper has consists in the fact that it can be used as a ground to call the election in question." He further clarified, "It follows by necessary implication from the language of this provision that those grounds cannot be urged in any other manner, at any other stage and before any other court."

This ruling aligns with the Supreme Court's interpretation in seminal cases like N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency and Ram Phal Kundu v. Kamal Sharma, reinforcing the doctrine that electoral disputes should be resolved only through designated legal channels post-election.

The decision underscores the judiciary's stance on maintaining the sanctity and procedural integrity of the electoral process. While dismissing the petition, the court granted the petitioners the liberty to seek appropriate legal remedy under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, after the conclusion of the elections.

Date of Decision: 20th November 2023

ZAHEED KHAN VS THE RETURNING OFFICER

Latest Legal News