Dr. Pramod Kumar Mishra vs Sri Chet Narain Singh
2017 Latest Caselaw 4611 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

AFR
 
Reserved on 06.01.2017
 
Delivered on 19.09.2017
 
Court No. - 34
 
Case :- ELECTION PETITION No. - 2 of 2014
 
Petitioner :- Dr. Pramod Kumar Mishra
 
Respondent :- Sri Chet Narain Singh
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dr. P.K.Mishra(In Person),Ravi Shanker Prasad,U.N. Sharma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Anil Sharma
 

 
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.

1. Election of Sri Chet Narain Singh (hereinafter referred to as the "Respondent") as Member of U.P. Legislative Council, Varanasi (Teachers) Constituency has been challenged by election-petitioner, Dr. Pramod Kumar Mishra (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioner").

2. Term of six members of U.P. State Legislative Council (Teachers') Constituencies including that of Varanasi was going to expire on 06.05.2014. Governor of U.P. thus issued notification for biennial elections 2014 to U.P. State Legislative Council under Section 16 of Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the "R.P. Act, 1951"). A press note dated 19.02.2014 was issued by Election Commission of India (hereinafter referred to as the "ECI") and consequent press note was issued by Chief Election Commission, U.P. (hereinafter referred to as the CEC U.P."), which was notified on 26.02.2014. Schedule of election reads as under:

"(1) Date of notification of the Election-26.02.2014 (Wednesday)

(2) Date of filing of Nomination Paper-26.02.2014 to 05.03.2014 (upto 3.00 PM)

(3) Date of scrutiny of Nomination Paper-06.02.2014 (Thursday)

(4) Date of withdrawal of Nomination paper- 08.03.2014 (Saturday)

(5) Date and time of polling-23.03.2014 (Sunday) 8.00 AM to 4.00 PM.

(6) Date of counting of votes-26.03.2014 (Wednesday)

(7) Date of declaration of result-26.03.2014 (Wednesday)."

3. Petitioner and Respondent, besides others, filed nomination papers. After scrutiny of nomination papers Returning Officer declared nomination papers of eight candidates, valid, which included Dr. Ram Vilas Singh Yadav, who was set up by Samajwadi Party. Rest seven candidates including Petitioner and Respondent were independent. Polling was held on 23.03.2014. Result was declared 26.03.2014 wherein Respondent-Sri Chet Narain Singh was declared returned having won election with a margin of 1925 votes.

4. The total number of voters as per Electoral Roll prepared for Varanasi (Teachers) Constituency consisted of 26958 voters, out of which 17935 voters cast their votes in the aforesaid election. After counting, 531 votes were found invalid. Total number of valid votes was 17404. Upto seventh round, Petitioner had secured 6833 votes while Respondent secured 7802 votes. Margin was 969. In eighth round Petitioner was eliminated and after transfer of 956 votes in favour of Respondent, result was declared in his favour.

5. Election of returned candidate has been assailed on the following grounds:

(i) Election is materially affected on account of improper reception of votes and it is in violation of Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of R.P. Act, 1951.

(ii) Election is materially affected on account of votes cast on polling booths mentioned in paragraphs 16, 18, 19 and 20 of election petition and schedules mentioned therein are void ad initio.

(iii) There is non-compliance of Article 171(2) and (3) clause (c) of Constitution of India, Rules and Clause 4.3 of Instruction No. 37/LC/2013-ERS dated 27.05.2013 and Clause 26 and 27 of Instruction No. A-132/CEO-4-142/4-2012 Lucknow dated 14.06.2013.

(iv) Election is materially affected due to "corrupt practices" as defined under Section 123(7) of R.P. Act, 1951 adopted by returned candidate. He obtained and procured services of a Gazetted Officer, Sri Chanchal Tiwari, Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi/ Registration Officer.

6. The grounds taken by Petitioner to challenge election of returned candidate are further detailed by stating that persons who did not fulfill qualification prescribed under Article 171(3)(c) of Constitution read with Section 27(5)(b) of Representation of People Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the "R.P. Act, 1950"), Clause 4.3.3 of Circular dated 27.05.2013 and paras 26 and 27 of Instruction dated 14.06.2013 have been treated as voters in Varanasi (Teachers) Constituency. Article 171(3)(c) does not bring within its ambit part-time teachers, teachers of Junior High Schools and Primary Schools, non-teaching staff and employees of educational institutions as valid voter. The electoral roll is confined to the teachers of Secondary Schools. In the present case, however persons other than "valid voters" have been registered as voters and participated in polling which vitiates entire election as it materially affects the result of election in question. Detailed facts have been given from paras 15 to 26 of election petition, which read as under:

"15. That the Returned Candidate was a candidate, closely related with the Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi Sri Chanchal Tiwari. Sri Chanchal Tiwari and Returned Candidate both were used to meet with each other in routine way and in furtherance of the election prospectus of the returned candidate entered into a conspiracy and in furtherance of the election prospectus inducted those persons who are not eligible for casting their votes in teachers' constituency. Under the provisions of Representation of Peoples Act and Rules framed there under only those teachers who have continuously worked for a period of three years in the constituency are eligible for the enrolment as voters of the said constituency. But the returned candidate in collusion with the Commissioner Sri Chanchal Tiwari inducted in the electoral roll those ineligible voters whose votes are void ab intio.

16. That the returned candidate and the Commissioner, Sri Chanchal Tiwari being a gazetted officer in furtherance of the election prospectus inducted large number of persons, who are not teachers at all. The details of polling booths where the aforesaid ineligible persons/ voters were casted their votes are being appended herewith as Schedule-II to this election petition, which may be treated as integral part of the pleadings.

17. That the election petitioner with profound respect submits the details of the names of the institutions in which part-time teachers are working and casted their votes in different polling station mentioned in above paragraph. These institutions whose voters are enrolled in the electoral roll can only appoint part time teachers. This is the complete violation of election notification clause 4.3.3. The election petitioner is filing a detail list of Vitta-Vihin Colleges where teachers are ineligible voters, which is being appended herewith as Schedule-III to this election petitioner, which may be treated as integral part of the pleading.

18. That apart from the above persons in booth no. 3 Kshetra Panchayat Office Pindra at Sl. No. 132 Anil Kumar Patel son of Late Mahadev, R/o Village Ghoghari is a sweeper but he has casted his votes in booth no. 3, Office, Kshetra Panchayat Pindra, Room No. 4. similarly in the aforesaid Booth No. 3 of Kshetra Panchayat Office, Pindra at Sl. No. 179 Sri Raj Kumar Patel son of Lalman Patel, R/o Village Naipura was working as Teacher in Primary School Ahirabeer , Varanasi and as per Act and Rules the teacher working in Primary School is not qualified or eligible for casting his vote but in spite of eligibility and disqualification he has casted his vote and hence reception of the aforesaid votes was void ab initio.

19. That at Booth No. 83, Kshetra Panchayat Office, Machhali Sharah, Jaunpur, there were 66 persons casted their votes as Teacher in Sarvodaya Vidyapith Inter College, Meerganj, Jaunpur but in fact they are not working as teacher in the said institution; hence, the votes casted by all the aforesaid persons are void. Apart from the aforesaid, at Booth No. 31, Barhani, District Chandauli, 64 persons have casted their votes, at Booth No. 36, Sahabganj, Chandauli, 22 persons have casted their votes, at Booth No. 28 Chahaniya, District Chandauli 13 persons have casted their votes at Booth No. 30 Dhanapur, Chandauli, 12 persons and Booth No. 29, Sakaldiha, Chandauli 10 persons have casted their votes. All these voters are teachers in Junior High School and as such they were ineligible to cast their votes, but they have casted their votes against the Act, Rules and institutions. Hence, the votes casted by the aforesaid voters are void ab initio. The election petitioner is filing a detail list of the teachers working in Junior High Schools who were ineligible to caste their votes, which is being appended hereby as Schedule-IV to this election petition, which may be treated as integral part of the pleading.

20. That the Registration Officer of the aforesaid constituency in connivance of the returned candidate in furtherance of the election prospectus over looked all the provisions of the Representation of Peoples Act and the instructions issued by the Election Commission of India in respect of revision of the electoral roll in respect of booth numbers and names of the electoral mentioned in Schedule-II, III & IV as also in above paragraphs. Office order dated 19.12.13 issued after publication of instruction with respect to 01.11.13 vide notification dated 14.06.13. This notification was in relation of revision of electoral roll which was circulated 50 days after the declaration of election circular. Circular in terms of Revision of electoral roll was made by Election Commission of India vide letter dated 25.05.13 and legally as per the constitution of India, when election process is started.

21. That those of persons who were not eligible for the registration in the electoral roll but Registration Officer, Sri Chanchal Tiwari, Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi in furtherance of the election prospectus of the returned candidate inducted their names. The returned candidate in furtherance of the election prospectus procured the service of the gazetted officer. The returned candidate in collusion with Sri Chanchal Tiwari prepared the papers for securing the elections of the returned candidate and inducted these persons whose name have been mentioned above as voters, who in fact not eligible to be enrolled in the electoral roll.

22. That the election petitioner had filed representations dated 17.11.2013 to the Divisional Commissioner/Electoral Registration Officer and District Magistrate/Assistant Electoral Registration Officer, Varanasi, Legislative Constituency, which were duly received in their office on 25.11.2013 requesting that only bona fide teachers' names should be countersigned by the District Inspector of Schools. Similarly, the election petitioner also sent a letter dated 11.12.2013 to the Assistant Registration Officer, District Sant Ravidas Nagar, Bhadohi requesting that only bona fide teachers' names should be countersigned by the District Inspector of Schools, Sant Ravidas Nagar, Bhadohi.

23. That the petitioner also made a representation to the Chief Election Officer, U.P. Lucknow vide letter dated 17.02.2014 regarding manipulation in the electoral roll of Varanasi (Teacher) Legislative Council Constituency.

24. That it is noteworthy to state that in pursuance to the direction issued by the Election Commission, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sakaldiha, Chandauli bringing guidelines issued by the Joint Secretary, U.P. Government dated 20.02.2014.

25. That in pursuance to the aforesaid communication, the District Inspector of Schools, Chandauli vide letter dated 24.02.2014 informed that part time teachers cannot be treated as teachers for the purposes of registration on electoral roll and the list which claimed to be sent under the signature of Dr. Malti Rai is not the signature of the District Inspector of Schools, Chandauli but it is a forged signature of Dr. Malti Rai.

26. That by non complying the provisions of Act and Rules, all the persons mentioned in the election petition were casted their votes in the constituency and since they are not eligible for registration, as electoral." (emphasis added)

7. Respondent has contested petition by filing reply/ written statement wherein he has raised a preliminary objection that petition is not presented as per the provisions of R.P. Act, 1951; grounds taken therein are not covered under Sections 81 and 171 of R.P. Act, 1951; material particulars have not been stated inasmuch as grounds no. A to D lack material particulars in support of grounds; and that the election was held as per voter list prepared by Election Commission, whereagainst no objection was filed by Petitioner within the time prescribed and once a voter list has been finalized, election cannot be challenged on the ground that voter list included ineligible voters. An election has to be held on the basis of electoral roll in force on the last date before making nomination. Vide Section 27(4) of R.P. Act, 1950 provisions of Sections 15, 16, 18, 21, 22 and 23 of said Act shall apply in relation to graduate constituency and Teachers' constituency as they apply in relation to assembly constituency. Provisions have been made for filing objections and disposal. Under Section 24 of R.P. Act, 1950 against the order of Electoral Registration Officer, an appeal is also provided and thereafter final list of electoral roll is published. ECI issued directions vide circular/ letter dated 27.05.2013 to Chief Electoral Officer of State of U.P. (hereinafter referred to as the "CEO, U.P.") and directed authorities regarding preparation of Electoral Roll of Election Constituency, Varanasi. Pursuant thereto CEO, U.P. issued circular dated 14.06.2013 directing for preparation of Electoral Roll as per direction of ECI and said letter was addressed to all Commissioners and Electoral Registration Officers of Legislative Constituencies in State of U.P. Pursuant thereto Electoral Registration Officer, Varanasi (Teachers) Constituency issued a public notice notified on 01.11.2013 and dates for eligibility and electoral roll preparation schedule were notified as under:

Sl. No.

Activities

Period of Teacher and Graduates Constituencies.

Campaign for collection for EPIC No. of Electors

26.08.2013 (Monday) to 14.09.2013 (Saturday)

Computerization of Electoral Roll

By 25.09.2013 (Wednesday)

Consolidation & Integration of Roll

By 25.09.2013 (Wednesday)

Printing of Draft Electoral Roll

By 30.09.2013 (Monday)

Issue of public notice in the News Paper & Date of Draft publication of Electoral Rolls

01.10.2013 (Tuesday)

Date of commencement of filing claims in Form-18 and Form-19 as the case may be

01.10.2013 (Tuesday)

First re-publication of notice in news papers

15.10.2013 (Tuesday)

Second re-publication of notice in news papers

25.10.2013 (Friday)

Period of filing claims and objections

01.10.2013 (Tuesday) to 30.10.2013 (Wednesday)

Disposal of claims and objections

03.12.2013 (Tuesday)

Preparation of supplementary lists and printing of Rolls.

07.01.2014 (Tuesday)

First publication of Electoral Rolls

10.01.2014 (Friday)

8. The ECI vide letter dated 08.01.2014 extended date of final publication of Electoral Roll by 01.02.2014. Consequently, CEC, U.P. also issued circular dated 09.01.2014 for publication of final Electoral Roll upto 01.02.2014. Petitioner did not file any objection within the time prescribed against voter list and it was finally published. As per Chapter-IV of Electoral Rolls of Councils Constituency, it is not open now to petitioner to challenge Electoral Roll in election petition. Election has rightly been conducted on the basis of Electoral Roll, in force, found basis for making nomination. Respondent has been declared elected having secured 8758 votes while Petitioner could secure only 6833 votes. Petitioner has also not impleaded all the contested candidates as per Section 82 of R.P. Act, 1951 hence election petition suffers a serious flaw of non-impleadment of necessary parties and deserves to be dismissed on this ground alone. Lastly it is pleaded that election petition is barred by limitation.

9. Replying various paragraphs of election petition, Respondent further contended that voter list contains names of persons who were entitled to cast votes. No objection was filed by Petitioner at the time of preparation of voter list. All valid enrolled voters were entitled to cast their votes. Petitioner contested election on the basis of voter list finally published. Having failed to take any objection thereto, now he cannot challenge inclusion of voters in voter list. It is not the case of Petitioner that persons whose names were in voter list, not allowed to cast their votes. If voters, whose names are included in voter list, exercised their rights, same cannot be a ground to challenge election of Respondent. Registration of Electoral Roll was in accordance with the provisions of Act and Rules framed thereunder. It is said in para 26 of written statement that Writ Petition No. 1269 of 2008 was filed by Madhyamik Vitta Viheen Prabandhak Mahasabha through its General Secretary, who himself was also party as petitioner no. 2, i.e., Sri Anil Yadav and President of said association, i.e., Sri Vijay Kumar Tripathi who was also party as petitioner no. 3. Aforesaid writ petition was filed raising a complaint that while preparing Electoral Roll for Teachers Constituency in U.P. Legislative Council, all those Teachers who, working in recognized institutions, but in unaided colleges, are deprived their rights to exercise franchise and their names are excluded from electoral roll, which is in violation of the provisions of Article 171(3)(c) of the Constitution. The writ petition was disposed of vide judgment dated 05.03.2008 and operative part of judgment reads as under:

"We under the circumstances, dispose of the writ petition finally with the direction that if any teacher who intends to get his name enrolled in the voter list of the teachers' constituency for the coming elections, he or she as the case may be, may approach the concerned officer (Electoral Registration Officer) within a period of fifteen days from today, after getting a certificate/counter signature from the District Inspector of Schools that he is a bonafide teacher of the recognised institution of the required length, whose standard is not below the standard as prescribed of or under any law of a secondary school.

We also direct that all the District Inspector of Schools in the State shall comply with the aforesaid direction and if any application is moved before them by any teacher they shall verify the same from the record of the college or from their own record, as may be available and in doing so, they will follow the norms prescribed. The Electoral Officer shall take final decision at least one month before the elections.

The text of this order be apprised to all the concerned authorities by the parties counsel through notarized affidavit for compliance without insisting for a certified copy of the order, pending its availability."

(emphasis added)

10. ECI in compliance of aforesaid judgment, issued circular dated 25.09.2013, adding para 33A in the guidelines dated 27.05.2013 and directed that Teachers of unaided private schools shall also be included in Electoral Roll who intends to get his/her name enrolled in "Teachers Constituency" and approaches Electoral Registration Officer after getting a certificate/ counter signature from District Inspector of Schools that he/she is bona fide Teacher of specified educational institution, has rendered required length of service and is a Teacher of an institution not below secondary school. Petitioner has not filed copy of said circular for lack of bona fide reasons.

11. It is further said that the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1921") quoted in paras 10 and 11 of election petition are not relevant. Petitioner cannot raise objection regarding inclusion of names of Teachers on the ground that they are part time Teachers and condition of three years teaching experience is not applicable to part time Teachers. All those who were found valid Teachers, their names are included and published in voter list and objection regarding inclusion of their names cannot be made a ground to file election petition. Provisions of Act, 1921 are not relevant and material for the purpose of enrollment of Teacher in voter list. Allegations of taking services of Sri Chanchal Tiwari, Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi are denied. It is said that Respondent met Commissioner in a routine way and has nothing to day with him, otherwise, for the purpose of election. Moreover, Sri Chanchal Tiwari was not Election Officer at the time of preparation of voter list. The facts stated in paras 15 to 26 of election petition have been replied in paras 32 to 43 of reply and same are reproduced as under:

"32. That the averments contained in para 15 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. It is submitted here that the answering respondent has no concern whatsoever with Sri Chanchal Tiwari, the then Commissioner Varanasi Region, Varanasi. It is incorrect to state that the answering respondent used to meet with Sri Chanchal Tiwari in a routine way. It is also incorrect to state that any conspiracy has been hatched by the answering respondent with Sri Chanchal Tiwari for inclusion of the names of certain teachers who were not eligible for costing their votes in the election. Sri Chanchal Tiwari was not the election officer at the time of preparation of the voter list. Further averments contained in paragraph under reply regarding the legibility of the teachers for enrolment in the voter list, as stated are not admitted. It is also denied that the answering respondent, in collusion with Sri Chanchal Tiwari inducted in the electoral roll, illegible voters whose votes were void.

33. That the averments contained in para 16 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that all the voters whose names were validly enrolled in the voter list casted their votes and the petitioner, at the time of enrolment of these voters, never raised any objection against their enrolment as voters in electoral roll. The list, Schedule-II is totally fabricated and are not admitted. The election was held on the basis of the valid voter list prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The said voter list cannot be challenged in the said election petition.

34. That the averments contained in para 17 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that the institutions, whose particulars have been given in Schedule-III also imparting education to the students whether aided or unaided and the teachers who are working in the institution, are entitled to be enrolled in the electoral roll and have right to cast their votes. It is incorrect that there is violation of Clause 4.33 of the notification. In view of Clause-4.33(a), teachers of unaided, institutions are also entitled for enrolment for casting their votes in the teacher constituency. Moreover, the petitioner now cannot challenge the inclusion of the name of teachers in the voter list by means of the election petition.

35. That the averments contained in para 18 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that there is no evidence in support of the aforesaid averments contained in paragraph under reply. If the names of the persons are included in the voter list, they have right to cast their votes. The petitioners have not raised any objection at the time of inclusion of their names in the voter list, the names of valid voters were included in the voter list and they casted their votes. If the averments contained in the paragraph under reply, though not supported by any matter, are allowed, the same will disturb the secrecy of the election.

36. That the averments contained in para 19 of the Election Petition are incorrect, nor admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that the allegations made in the paragraph under reply are incorrect and have been made for the purposes of the election petition. The allegations regarding booth no. 83, booth no. 31, booth no. 36, booth no. 28, booth no. 30 and booth no. 29 are not supported by any material particulars and vague averments have been made. It is not stated whether all these persons casted their votes in the election. Moreover, if the names of the persons have been included in the voter list, they have a right to cast their votes in the election. The averments will disturb the secrecy of election, as such, cannot be taken into consideration.

37. That the averments contained in para 20 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that the registration officer of the constituency in connivance with the answering respondent and in furtherance of the election prospects over looked any provisions of the Representation of People Act and the electoral roll whose particulars have been stated in Schedule-I, II, III and IV and in the paragraphs of the election petition. The provisions of the Act, Rules and notification of the election commission was duly followed in revision of the electoral roll. It may be stated here that after publication of the electoral roll, no objection was filed by the petitioner within the time prescribed. The electoral roll was finalized, published and became final and cannot be challenged by means of election petition. In fact, by means of the present election petition, the petitioner wants to challenge the electoral roll which is not permissible. The allegations made in the election petition by the petitioner will disturb the secrecy of the election.

38. That the averments contained in para 21 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that the allegation regarding the registration officer Sri Chanchal Tiwari Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi are vehemently denied. There is no material particulars how Sri Chanchal Tiwari acted in furtherance of the election prospects in favour of answering respondent and in which manner, how and why he inducted the names of illegible voters. The petitioner had a remedy at the time of enrolment of voters to file objection and in case objection is rejected, right to appeal is provided to the objector. It is also denied that the services of gazette officer was procured by the answering respondent. The allegation of collusion with Sri Chanchal Tiwari has no concern whatsoever for induction of any name in the voter list. It may further be pointed out here that in view of Clause 3.33A, the legible persons, with material particulars and counter signed by the DIOS approached the electoral roll and the electoral roll officer has no right except to enroll the said persons as voter.

39. That the averments contained in para 22 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that the petitioner has put to strict proof of the allegations contained in paragraph under reply. The paragraph under reply lacking material particulars, as such, are denied. It may be further stated here that in view of the directions of the election commission, if the DIOS found that the person is legible for enrolment as a valid voter, he counter signed his form and the electoral officer has no jurisdiction except to include the names of such persons in the electoral roll. At the time of preparation of the voter list, if the names of illegible persons have been included, the petitioner has a right to file an objection, which he failed to do.

40. That the averments contained in para 23 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that the objection can be filed upto 1.2.2014 against the voter list was finally published and no objection could be entertained by any authority including the election commission of India.

41. That the averments contained in para 24 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that the petitioner is put to strict proof of the allegations contained in paragraph under reply. The paragraph under reply does not contain the material particulars in support of the averments contained in paragraph under reply.

42. That the averments contained in para 25 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that after publication of the final voter list on 1.2.2014, no objection of any kind can be taken into consideration. The further averments are vague and as such are denied.

43. That the averments contained in para 26 of the Election Petition are incorrect, not admitted hence denied. In reply thereto, it is submitted here that in view of the fact as stated here in before, it is incorrect to state that illegible voters have been enrolled in the electoral roll. As point out here in before, the voter list was finally published after taking into consideration the objections. The petitioner has not filed any objection against inclusion of the names of the voters whose particulars have been mentioned in the election petition, as such, the petitioner cannot challenge the voter list."

(emphasis added)

12. In additional pleas it is said that grounds mentioned in Section 81 and 117 of R.P. Act, 1951 are not available to Petitioner. No cause of action has been disclosed. Final voter list prepared under the provisions of R.P. Act, 1951 cannot be challenged in election petition since Petitioner has remedy against electoral roll by filing objection and thereafter taking the matter in appeal which he failed. No valid grounds have been disclosed and averments are vague, hence paras 11, 12 and 14 to 27 of election petition are liable to be struck off. The allegations are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous and vexatious. They prejudice right of Respondent and to delay fair trial of election petition. In an election petition, allegations of corrupt practice could be taken when a person became candidate after filing nomination under Section 79(6) of R.P. Act, 1951 and objection regarding electoral roll cannot be raised in view of Section 62(ii) of R.P. Act, 1951 which provides that any person for the time being entered in electoral roll shall be entitled to vote in that constituency.

13. After exchange of pleadings and in the light of rival submissions, Court formulated 12 issues, vide order dated 19.11.2014, as under:

i. Whether election of returned candidate has materially affected on account of improper reception of void votes of part time teachers and others persons mentioned in paragraph no. 16, 17, 18, 19 and schedule II, III and IV of the election petition?

ii. Whether votes of part time teachers and other persons mentioned in paragraph no. 16, 17, 18, 19 and schedule II, III & IV of election petition are void ab initio in view of the provision of Article 171(2),(3)(C) of the Constitution of India read with Section 27(3),(4), (5) of Representation of People Act, 1951 and Clause 4.3 of Instruction No.37(LC/2013-ERS dated 27.05.2013 and Clause No. 26 & 27 of Instructions No. A-132/CEO-4-142/4-2012 Lucknow dated 14-06-2013 issued thereunder?

iii. Whether any ineligible voter was inducted in electoral roll and he /they have voted so as to materially affect the result of election?

iv. Whether returned candidate has procured service of any Gazetted Officer for enhancing his election prospects and thereby has committed corrupt practice under Section 123(7) of Representation of People Act, 1951?

v. Whether election of returned candidate as Member of Legislative Council from U.P. State Legislative Council Varanasi (Teachers) Constituency is liable to be declared as void being contrary to the provision of Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of Representation of People Act, 1951?

vi. Whether allegation relating the period prior to filing nomination can be taken into consideration for adjudging legality or validity of election?

vii. Whether a finally published voter list prior to nomination can be a ground of challenging election of return candidate? If not, its effect.

viii. Whether allegations are not supported by material particulars as required under Order VI, Rule 16 C.P.C.? If so, its effect.

ix. Whether election petition does not disclose cause of action? If so, its effect.

x. Whether election petition is maintainable on the pleading, as stated in the election petition?

xi. Whether election petition is properly presented?

xii. Whether election petition is not maintainable?"

(emphasis added)

14. Petitioner filed voluminous documents marked as papers no. A15 to A42 in three volumes. All these documents were not admitted by Respondent. Thereafter only paper No. A32 was proved and marked as Exhibit-P1. Another document was filed as paper No. A79 later on and that has been marked as Exhibit-P2.

15. Oral deposition in support of election petition included statements of following:

1. Dr. Pramod Kumar Mishra, Election Petitioner-PW1.

2. Vinod Kumar Pandey, Assistant Teahcer L.T. Grade, Yugal Bihari Inter College-PW3.

3. Vijay Pratap Singh, Lecturer, Kachcha Baba Inter College, Jalahpur, Varanasi-PW4.

4. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, Assistant Teacher, Nehru Adarsh Inter College, Alamganj Jaunpur-PW5.

5. Akhilendra Kumar, Principal Nehru Memorial Inter College, Nahora, Jaunpur-PW6.

6. Mrs. Malti Rai, District Inspector of Schools, Chandauli-PW7.

7. Shatrunjay Kumar Singh, Joint Secretary, Secondary Education, U.P.-PW8.

8. Vivek Kumar Mishra, Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade, Badri Narain Inter College, Kaniya, Varanasi-PW9.

9. Pratap Narain Srivastava.

16. Documentary evidence adduced by Respondent consists of following:

Sl. No.

Particulars

Date

Paper No.

Exhibit No.

Letter of Election Commission

27/05/13

A-43

R-1

Letter of Election Commission

14/06/13

A-44

R-2

Election Programme

13/09/13

A-45

R-3

Circular letter of Election Commission of India

08/01/14

A-46

R-4

Circular of Chief Election Officer, U.P.

09/01/14

A-47

R-5

Press note of Election Commission of India

19/02/14

A-48

R-6

Press note of Chief Election Officer, U.P.

19/02/14

A-49

R-7

Copy of circular

25/09/13

A-50

R-8

Judgment of Lucknow Bench of this Court

05/03/08

A-51

R-9

17. Oral evidence consists of three witnesses, i.e., Sri Chet Narain Singh, Respondent as DW-1; Sri Raghuvansh Rai, Member, U.P. Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh as DW-2; and, Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, Lecturer (Chemistry) in B.R.P. Inter College, Jaunpur as DW-3.

18. Learned counsel for parties also filed their written arguments reiterating their oral submissions.

19. Basically election of Respondent has been challenged on the ground of reception of invalid votes, corrupt practice by taking service of a gazette officer and inaccuracy in voter list due to inclusion of part time teachers, non teaching staff, teachers of primary schools etc.

20. Article 171 of the Constitution provides composition of Legislative Council of States and reads as under:

"171. Composition of the Legislative Councils--(1) The total number of members in the Legislative Council of a State having such a Council shall not exceed one third of the total number of members in the Legislative Assembly of that State:

Provided that the total number of members in the Legislative Council of a State shall in no case be less than forty.

(2) Until Parliament by law otherwise provides, the composition of the Legislative Council of a State shall be as provided in clause (3).

(3) Of the total number of members of the Legislative council of a State--

(a) as nearly as may be, one third shall be elected by electorates consisting of members of municipalities, district boards and such other local authorities in the State as Parliament may by law specify;

(b) as nearly as may be, one twelfth shall be elected by electorates consisting of persons residing in the State who have been for at least three years graduates of any university in the territory of India or have been for at least three years in possession of qualifications prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament as equivalent to that of a graduate of any such university;

(c) as nearly as may be, one twelfth shall be elected by electorates consisting of persons who have been for at least three years engaged in teaching in such educational institutions within the State, not lower in standard than that of a secondary school, as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament;

(d) as nearly as may be, one third shall be elected by the members of the Legislative Assembly of the State from amongst persons who are not members of the Assembly;

(e) the remainder shall be nominated by the Governor in accordance with the provisions of clause (5).

(4) The members to be elected under sub clauses (a), (b) and (c) of clause ( 3 ) shall be chosen in such territorial constituencies as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament, and the elections under the said sub clauses and under sub clause (d) of the said clause shall be held in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote.

(5) The members to be nominated by the Governor under sub clause (e) of clause ( 3 ) shall consist of persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters as the following, namely: Literature, science, art, co-operative movement and social service." (emphasis added)

21. In the present case we are concerned with 'Electors' contemplated under Article 171(3)(c) consisting of persons who have been for atleast three years engaged in teaching in such educational institution within the State not lower in standard than that of a secondary schools as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament. Therefore, for other details we have to go to the relevant Parliament's enactment.

22. Allocation of seats in Legislative Council of State of U.P. vide Section 10 of R.P. Act, 1950 read with 3rd Schedule, Column 5, is eight. Chapter IV of R.P. Act, 1950 deals with preparation of electoral roll for Council constituencies. For our purposes Section 27(1),(3), (4), (5), and (6) are relevant, which reads as under:

"27. Preparation of electoral roll for Council constituencies.--(1) In this section, "local authorities' constituency", "graduates' constituency" and "teachers' constituency" mean a constituency for the purpose of elections to a Legislative Council under sub-clause (a), sub-clause (b) and sub-clause (c), respectively, of clause (3) of article 171.

......

(3) For the purpose of elections to the Legislative Council of a State in the graduates' constituencies and the teachers' constituencies, the State Government concerned may, with the concurrence of the Election Commission, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify-

(a) the qualifications which shall be deemed to be equivalent to that of a graduate of a university in the territory of India, and

(b) the educational institutions within the State not lower in standard than that of a secondary school.

(4) The provisions of sections 15, 16, 18, 21, 22 and 23 shall apply in relation to graduates' constituencies and teachers' constituencies as they apply in relation to assembly constituencies.

(5) Subject to the foregoing provisions of this section,--

(a) every person who is ordinarily resident in a graduates' constituency and has, for at least three years before the qualifying date, been either a graduate of a university in the territory of India or in possession of any of the qualifications specified under clause (a) of sub-section (3) by the State Government concerned, shall be entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for that constituency; and

(b) every person who is ordinarily resident in a teachers' constituency, and has, within the six years immediately before the qualifying date for a total period of at least three years, been engaged in teaching in any of the educational institutions specified under clause (b) of sub-section (3) by the State Government concerned, shall be entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for that constituency.

(6) For the purposes of sub-sections (4) and (5) the qualifying date shall be the Ist day of November of the year in which the preparation or revision of the electoral roll is commenced."

(emphasis added)

23. In exercise of powers under Article 324 of Constitution of India, ECI has issued circular dated 27.05.2013 (Paper No. A43/1-22, Exhibit R-1) laying down comprehensive instructionस for electoral rolls for Legislative Councils. For Teachers' constituencies it has referred to Section 27(5)(b) of R.P. Act, 1950 and says that a person must fulfill following conditions for being entitled to be registered in electoral roll of Teachers' constituencies;

(i) should be ordinarily resident in Teachers' Constituency;

(ii) within the six years immediately before qualifying date, for a total period of atleast three years should have been engaged in teaching in any of the educational institution specified clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 27 of R.P. Act, 1950 by State Government concerned as educational institution within the state, not lower in standard than that of a secondary school; and,

(iii) qualifying date shall be the 1st November of the year in which preparation or revision in electoral roll is commenced.

24. It refers to Section 15, 16, 18, 21, 22 and 23 of R.P. Act, 1950 which will apply in relation to Teachers' Constituencies as they apply in relation to Assembly Constituencies and also Rule 31 of Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules, 1960") which provides that roll for every Teachers' Constituency shall be prepared in such form, manner and language as the Election Commission may direct. It also says that Rules 10 to 27 except Rule 13(1)(c) and (2)(c) of Rules, 1960 shall apply in relation to Teachers' Constituencies as they apply in relation to Assembly Constituencies. The claim application for inclusion in roll of Teachers' Constituency shall be made in Form 19. Dealing with procedure for enrolment in para 2.2 the circular dated 27.05.2013 provides as under:

"2.2 For Graduates' and Teachers' Constituencies-

2.2.1 As mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, the qualifying date for being enrolled in these constituencies is 1st day of November of the year in which the preparation or revision of the electoral rolls is commenced.

2.2.2 According to Rule 31 of Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 the Electoral Registration Officer shall issue a public notice or or before 1st October calling upon every person entitled to be registered in that roll to send to or deliver at his office before the 7th day of November next following an application in Form 18 or Form 19 as the case may be, for inclusion of name.

2.2.3 The said notice shall be published in two newspapers having circulation in the constituency and republished in them once on or about 15th October and again on or about 25th October."

25. Regarding revision of electoral rolls of Graduates and Teachers' Constituencies, para 3 of aforesaid circular provides as under:

"3. Revision of Electoral Rolls of Graduates' and Teachers' Constituencies-

According to sub-section (4) of Section 27 of Representation of People Act, 1950, the provisions of Section 15, 16, 18, 21, 22 and 23 shall apply in relation to Graduates' and Teachers' constituencies as they apply in relation to assembly constituencies. According to sub-section (2) of Section 21 of Representation of the People Act, 1950, the electoral rolls shall, unless otherwise directed by the Election Commission for reasons to be recorded in writing, be revised in the prescribed manner with reference to the qualifying date before every general election or before every bye-election to fill a casual vacancy and in any year, if such revision has been directed by the Election Commission, provided that if the electoral rolls are not revised as aforesaid the validity or continued operation of the said electoral rolls shall not thereby be affected. It is clear from this provision of law that electoral rolls of Graduates' and Teachers' constituencies are of permanent nature. They do not have to be prepared de-novo before every election. They only need to be revised with reference to the qualifying date, which is 1st day of November of the year in which the preparation or revision of rolls is commenced. The revision should be done in the year in which the election is due from the constituency and in the year previous to the year. Accordingly, Chief Electoral Officer should prepare schedule for revision of electoral rolls of Graduates' and Teachers' constituencies well before the date of publication of notice for enrolment on 1st October of the year in which the election is due from the constituency and also in the year previous to that year, and send it for approval of the Commission."

26. In para 4 of circular, ECI has provided a special guideline for revision of electoral rolls and in respect of Teachers' constituency. In para 4.3 it has said as under:

"4.3 Teachers' Constituencies-

4.3.1 Before revision of electoral rolls in the year in which the election is due from the constituency and in the year previous to that year, the Chief Electoral Officer should obtain a copy of all Notifications issued by the State Government under Section 27(2) (3) (b) of Representation of the People Act, 1950, to specify the educational institutions within the State not lower in standard than that of a secondary school. The Chief Electoral Officer should then prepare an updated list of such specified educational institution and send a copy of the list to every Electoral Registration Officer. Wide publicity should be given to the list of specified educational institutions for information of the Public.

4.3.2 Enrolment in Teachers' constituency requires that the elector should have, within the six years immediately before the qualifying date for a total period of atleast three years been engaged in teaching in any of the specified educational institutions. Since this status can change every year, it is necessary to verify the status of this qualification for every elector enrolled in teachers' constituency not only at the time of first time enrolment but at the time of each revision as well. If at the time of revision on verification, it is found that an elector is no longer qualified to be enrolled based on this qualification, his name should be deleted from the electoral rolls of Teachers' constituency.

4.3.3 The engagement of a person in teaching in the specified educational institutions for at least three year within the preceding six years may be either in one continuous spell or in broken spells and further, may be either in one institution or more institutions, but all such institutions must be specified by the State Government. Therefore, it is immaterial whether a person, who has been so engaged in teaching for a total period of three years in one or more specified educational institutions, has been employed in those institutions as teacher on regular basis or on ad-hoc basis but he should be whole time teacher (even if there is no sanctioned post) and not engaged on a part-time basis as the condition for three years engagement in teaching cannot be fulfilled by a part-time teacher. Part-time teachers are not eligible for enrolment in the electoral rolls of Teachers' constituency.

4.3.4. Every person applying for enrollment (in Form -19) in Teachers' constituency must submit documentary proof of having been engaged in teaching in any of the specified educational institutions for a total period of at least three years within six years immediately before the qualifying date. Electoral Registration Officer / Assistant Electoral Registration Officer concerned should make such verification of the documentary proof as he considers necessary. A certificate by the Head of the teaching institution should normally be considered adequate documentary proof of possessing that teaching qualification. If any person, who has applied for inclusion of his name in a teachers' constituency, has been engaged in teaching in more than one specified educational institutions in the last six years, the certificate from the Head of institution of each of such educational institution will be required for the period for which he was engaged in teaching in that educational institution. The certificate from the Head of the institution shall be in the Format at Annexure-2.

4.3.5. Electoral Registration Officer should maintain a history table of teaching in a specified educational institution for each elector enrolled in the Teachers' constituency in the Format at Annexure-3, Data in the history table should be updated at the time of revision in the year in which the election is due from the constituency and in the year previous to that year. If Electoral Registration Officer / Assistant Electoral Registration Officer finds that an elector enrolled in Teachers' constituency has not been engaged in teaching for a total period of at least three years within six years immediately before the qualifying date, he should take immediate action for deletion of the name of such elector from the electoral rolls. Electoral Registration Officer / Assistant Electoral Registration Officer can obtain the information for keeping this history table updated either directly from electors or from the heads of the concerned educational institutions. Before deletion of name of a person from the electoral rolls a notice has to be served on him giving an opportunity to prove that he is still qualified to remain enrolled in the concerned Teachers' Constituency.

4.3.6. As soon as Electoral Registration Officer receives list of specified educational institutions obtained by the Chief Electoral Officer from State Government he should collect information about all persons who are eligible for enrollment in Teachers' Constituency from heads of specified educational institutions, to check whether all such eligible persons are enrolled in the electoral rolls or not. If the Electoral Registration Officer finds that an eligible person is left out, he should send a blank Form 19 to the concerned person with a request to fill the application form and send it to Electoral Registration Officer through the head of the institution, in which the applicant has been working.

4.3.7. Section 20(4) of the RP Act, 1950 does not apply for this purpose of electoral rolls for Teachers' Constituency. Therefore, the facility of enrollment of declared office holders in native place by the declaration in Form 1 is not available in the case of Teachers' constituency. They can get their name enrolled in the place where they are ordinarily resident for the time being.

4.3.8. In case a person who is resident in a particular place at the time of filling the application, later on shifts to some other place outside the constituency, he loses his residential qualification and his application is liable to be rejected by Electoral Registration Officer. But if a person moves to another place within the same constituency and the new place of residence is also known to the Electoral Registration Officer, he can include the name of the applicant at that new address which is different from the address mentioned in the claim form.

4.3.9. It is not necessary that the educational institution in which an eligible elector is employed should also fall within the same Teachers' constituency. The eligibility to be enrolled in a particular Teachers' constituency should be determined on the basis of the applicants' place of ordinary residence and not on the basis of his place of work.

4.3.10. Applications in bulk whether submitted in person or by post, shall not be considered for inclusion by the Electoral Registration Officer. However, the Head of the Institutions may forward the applications of all his eligible staff together. Similarly, a person may also submit Form 19 in respect other eligible members of his family, residing at the same address and may get the certificate verified by producing original certificates in respect of each member. Any bulk applications submitted by political parties, Booth Level Agents or Resident Welfare Associations shall not be considered." (emphasis added)

27. Section 16 of R.P. Act, 1950 which has been made applicable for preparation of electoral roll for Teachers' constituencies also by virtue of Section 27(4) provides disqualification for registration in electoral roll and reads as under:

"16. Disqualifications for registration in an electoral roll.--(1) A person shall be disqualified for registration in an electoral roll if he--

(a) is not a citizen of India; or

(b) is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court; or

(c) is for the time being disqualified from voting under the provisions of any law relating to corrupt practices and other offences in connection with elections.

(2) The name of any person who becomes so disqualified after registration shall forthwith be struck off the electoral roll in which it is included:

Provided that the name of any person struck off the electoral roll of a constituency by reason of a disqualification under clause (c) of sub-section (1) shall forthwith be re-instated in that roll if such disqualification is, during the period such roll is in force, removed under any law authorising such removal."

28. Section 17 states that no person shall be entitled to be registered in electoral roll for more than one constituency and Section 18 provides that no person shall be entitled to be registered in electoral roll for any constituency more than once. Section 19 provides condition for registration and reads as under:

"19. Conditions of registration.--Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Part, every person who --

 
(a) is not less than eighteen years of age on the qualifying date, and
 
(b) is ordinarily resident in a constituency, shall be entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for that constituency."    (emphasis added)
 
29.	Section 20 defines meaning of "ordinarily resident" and reads as under:
 
"20. Meaning of "ordinarily resident".--(1) A person shall not be deemed to be ordinarily resident in a constituency on the ground only that he owns, or is in possession of, a dwelling house therein.
 
(1A) A person absenting himself temporarily from his place of ordinary residence shall not by reason thereof cease to be ordinarily resident therein.
 

(1B) A member of Parliament or of the Legislature of a State shall not during the term of his office cease to be ordinarily resident in the constituency in the electoral roll of which he is registered as an elector at the time of his election as such member, by reason of his absence from that constituency in connection with his duties as such member.

(2) A person who is a patient in any establishment maintained wholly or mainly for the reception and treatment of persons suffering from mental illness or mental defectiveness, or who is detained in prison or other legal custody at any place, shall not by reason thereof be deemed to be ordinarily resident therein.

(3) Any person having a service qualification shall be deemed to be ordinarily resident on any date in the constituency in which, but for his having such service qualification, he would have been ordinarily resident on that date.

(4) Any person holding any office in India declared by the President in consultation with the Election Commission to be an office to which the provisions of this sub-section apply, shall be deemed to be ordinarily resident on any date in the constituency in which, but for the holding of any such office, he would have been ordinarily resident on that date.

(5 ) The statement of any such person as is referred to in sub-section (3 ) or sub-section (4 ) made in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner, that but for his having the service qualification or but for his holding any such office as is referred to in sub-section (4) he would have been ordinarily resident in a specified place on any date, shall, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, be accepted as correct.

(6) The wife of any such person as is referred to in sub-section (3 ) or sub-section (4 ) shall if she be ordinarily residing with such person be deemed to be ordinarily resident on in the constituency specified by such person under sub-section (5).

(7) If in any case a question arises as to where a person is ordinarily resident at any relevant time, the question shall be determined with reference to all the facts of the case and to such rules as may be made in this behalf by the Central Government in consultation with the Election Commission.

(8 ) In sub-sections (3 ) and (5 ) "service qualification" means--

(a ) being a member of the armed forces of the Union; or

(b ) being a member of a force to which the provisions of the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950), have been made applicable whether with or without modifications; or

(c ) being a member of an armed police force of a State, who is serving outside that State; or

(d ) being a person who is employed under the Government of India, in a post outside India." (emphasis added)

30. Section 21 talks of preparation and revision of electoral rolls and Section 22 deals with correction of entries in electoral rolls. Both these provisions read as under:

"21. Preparation and revision of electoral rolls. -- (1) The electoral roll for each constituency shall be prepared in the prescribed manner by reference to the qualifying date and shall come into force immediately upon its final publication in accordance with the rules made under this Act.

(2) The said electoral roll--

(a) shall, unless otherwise directed by the Election Commission for reasons to be recorded in writing, be revised in the prescribed manner by reference to the qualifying date-

(i) before each general election to the House of the People or to the Legislative Assembly of a State; and

(ii) before each bye-election to fill a casual vacancy in a seat allotted to the constituency; and

(b ) shall be revised in any year in the prescribed manner by reference to the qualifying date if such revision has been directed by the Election Commission:

Provided that if the electoral roll is not revised as aforesaid, the validity or continued operation of the said electoral roll shall not thereby be affected.

(3 ) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2 ), the Election Commission may at any time, for reasons to be recorded, direct a special revision of the electoral roll for any constituency or part of a constituency in such manner as it may think fit:

Provided that subject to the other provisions of this Act, the electoral roll for the constituency, as in force at the time of the issue of any such direction, shall continue to be in force until the completion of the special revision so directed."

"22. Correction of entries in electoral rolls.--If the electoral registration officer for a constituency, on application made to him or on his own motion, is satisfied after such inquiry as he thinks fit, that any entry in the electoral roll of the constituency-

(a) is erroneous or defective in any particular,

(b) should be transposed to another place in the roll on the ground that the person concerned has changed his place of ordinary residence within the constituency, or

(c) should be deleted on the ground that the person concerned is dead or has ceased to be ordinarily resident in the constituency or is otherwise not entitled to be registered in that roll, the electoral registration officer shall, subject to such general or special directions, if any, as may be given by the Election Commission in this behalf, amend, transpose or delete the entry:

Provided that before taking any action on any ground under clause (a) or clause (b) or any action under clause (c) on the ground that the person concerned has ceased to be ordinarily resident in the constituency or that he is otherwise not entitled to be registered in the electoral roll of that constituency, the electoral registration officer shall give the person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of the action proposed to be taken in relation to him."

31. A question arose whether Teachers of secondary institutions which are recognized but unaided, would qualify to be included in electoral roll of Teachers' constituency and it was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1269 (M/B) of 2008 (Madhyamik Vitta Viheen Vidyalaya Prabandhak Maha Sabha and others Vs. State of U.P. and others), decided on 05.03.2008. This Court found that it is wholly irrelevant whether secondary institution is aided or unaided for preparing electoral roll of Teachers' constituency and issued directions to include such Teachers in electoral roll if they approach concerned officer after getting a certificate counter signed by District Inspector of Schools that he is a bona fide Teacher of required length and standard of Teacher is not below than the standard as prescribed under any law of secondary school.

32. Consequent to said judgment, ECI issued a letter dated 25.09.2013 (Paper No. A-50/1, Exhibit R-8) adding para 4.3.3A in para 4.3 of its earlier circular dated 27.05.2013. Pursuant to circular dated 27.05.2013 issued by ECI, CEC, UP also issued letter dated 14.06.2013 (Paper No. A-44, Exhibit R-2) and in respect of Teachers' constituency, in para 26 to 29, it says as under:

"26- f'k{kd fuokZpu {ks=ksa ds laca/k esa izR;sd iqujh{k.k ds iwoZ

¼pquko dk o"kZ rFkk mlds ,d o"kZ iwoZ½ jkT; ljdkj ls mu 'kS{kf.kd laLFkkuksa dh lwph izkIr dh tk;sxh tks lsds.Mjh Ldwy ds Lrj ls de ugha gSA

26. Regarding teachers' constituencies, before each revision (in the election year and one year prior to that), list of those educational institutions shall be obtained from the State Government which are not below the level of secondary school.

27- f'k{kd fuokZpu {ks=ksa es fo|eku O;oLFkk ds vuqlkj ogh f'k{kd fuokZpd ukekoyh esa lfEefyr gksus ds ik= gSa tks xr 06 o"kksZa esa 03 o"kZ f'k{kd jgs gksaA pwafd mudh izkfLFkfr esa izR;sd o"kZ ifjorZu gks ldrk gS vr% izR;sd ckj mudh vfuok;Z vgZrk dk lR;kiu fd;k tkuk vko';d gksxkA ;fn dksbZ f'k{kd fu/kkZfjr ik=rk dks [kks nsrk gS rks mldk uke fuokZpd ukekoyh ls gVk fn;k tk;sxkA f'k{kd dh lsok ds fy;s leLr lacaf/kr laLFkkvkas ds izkpk;Z }kjk izek.k&i= izkIr fd;k tk;sxk ftldk izk:i vk;ksx ds mDr fn'kk&funsZ'kksa ds lkFk layXu gSA va'kdkfyd v/;kid fuokZpd ukekoyh esa uke lfEefyr djkus ds ik= ugha gksaxsA

27. As per the existing provisions, only those teachers are eligible to be included in the teachers' electoral roll of teachers' constituencies who have been teacher for 03 years in last 06 years. As their status may change every year, therefore it shall be mandatory to verify their essential eligibility. If any teacher loses prescribed eligibility, his name shall be removed from the electoral roll. For the service of a teacher, a certificate shall be obtained from the principal of all the concerned institutions, format thereof is annexed with the said guidelines. Part-time teachers shall not be eligible for getting their names included in the electoral roll.

28- fuokZpd jftLVªhdj.k vf/kdkjh fufnZ"V 'kS{kf.kd laLFkkvkas dh lwph izkIr gksus ds i'pkr~ lHkh lacaf/kr 'kS{kf.kd laLFkkvksa ds izeq[kksa dks lkns QkeZ&19 Hkstrs gq;s vuqjks/k djsaxs fd ik= f'k{kdksa ds QkeZ Hkjokdj fuokZpd jftLVªhdj.k vf/kdkjh dks le; ls miyC/k djk fn;s tk;saA

28. After receiving the list of specified educational institutions, the Electoral Registration Officer shall send blank Form-19 to the heads of all the concerned educational institutions with a request that the forms be made available to the Electoral Registration Officer in due time after getting filled up the same for eligible teachers.

29- izR;sd fuokZpd f'k{kd ds laca/k es mlds }kjk fd;s x;s 'kS{kf.kd dk;Z dk bfrgkl rS;kj fd;k tk;sxk ftldk izk:i vk;ksx ds funsZ'kksa ds layXu&3 esa fn;k x;k gSA ;fn ik= u gksus ds vk/kkj ij fdlh dk uke gVk;k tk;sxk tks mls uksfVl nh tk;sxhA

29. Regarding each elector teacher, a history of educational work performed by him shall be prepared whose format is given in Exhibit-3 of the guidelines of the Commission. If name of anyone is removed on the basis of not being eligible, a notice shall be served to him." (emphasis added) (English translation by Court)

33. A schedule for preparation/ revision of electoral roll for Teachers' Constituency, Varanasi was published by Commissioner, Varanasi Division/ Electoral Registration Officer (Teachers' Constituency), Varanasi on 13.09.2013 (Paper No. A45, Exhibit R-3). This schedule was published by Electoral Registration Officer pursuant to similar press note issued by CEC, UP vide letter dated 03.09.2013. The date of final publication of electoral roll was extended to 01.02.2014 by ECI vide letter dated 08.01.2014 (Paper No. A-46, Exhibit R-4).

34. CEC, UP vide letter dated 09.01.2014 communicated aforesaid extension of final publication of electoral rolls to all Commissioners/ Electoral Registration Officers of Lucknow, Varanasi, Jhansi, Agra, Meerut, Gorakhpur and Bareilly and also to other concerned persons, namely, recognized political parties, Assistant Electoral Registration Officers etc.

35. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Section 7-AA of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1921") stating that it talks of employment of "part time teachers" and part time instructors. Thus "part time teachers" are appointed initially partwise and paid some honorarium by Committee of Management from their own resources. Their appointment is not under the control of educational authorities but these "part time teachers" cannot be treated as teachers as contemplated under Article 171(3)(c) of Constitution read with Section 27 of R.P. Act, 1950. The basic submission is that these "part time teachers" working in unaided colleges have been included in voters list and such list claims to be Schedule 3 to election petition and Schedule 2 contains details of polling booths where alleged ineligible persons/ voters casts their votes. Next objection raised is that even teachers working in Junior High School, i.e., lower secondary schools were included in voter list for Teachers' Constituency and a list of such teachers is placed on record as Schedule 4 to election petition.

36. In entire election petition it is not the case of petitioner that any person whose name is not included in voter list has been allowed to cast vote and thereby result has been materially affected.

37. A basic question has been raised by learned counsel appearing for Returned Candidate, i.e., Respondent, whether an election petition challenging election of a person in violation of Section 100(1)(d)(3) read with Section 123(7) of R.P. Act, 1951 is maintainable on the ground that voter list was not correctly prepared and persons whose names were included in voter list were ineligible or invalid voters.

38. I find that since this question goes to root of the matter, it is appropriate to have a retrospect of relevant judicial precedents on this aspect. At this stage I also find that Issues- 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 which relate to correctness of voter list can also be examined since facts of law are intermingled and well interwoven hence all these aspects can be looked into simultaneously.

39. Section 62 of R.P. Act, 1951 confers right to vote. Language is in negative. It states as to who are the persons who do not have any right to vote. It reads as under:

"62. Right to vote.--(1) No person who is not, and except as expressly provided by this Act, every person who is, for the time being entered in the electoral roll of by any constituency shall be entitled to vote in that constituency.

(2) No person shall vote at an election in any constituency if he is subject to any of the disqualifications referred to in section 16 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (43 of 1950).

(3) No person shall vote at a general election in more than one constituency of the same class, and if a person votes in more than one such constituency, his votes in all such constituencies shall be void.

(4) No person shall at any election vote in the same constituency more than once, notwithstanding that his name may have been registered in the electoral roll for that constituency more than once, and if he does so vote, all his votes in that constituency shall be void.

(5) No person shall vote at any election if he is confined in a prison, whether under a sentence of imprisonment or transportation or otherwise, or is in the lawful custody of the police.

Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to a person subjected to preventive detention under any law for the time being in force.

(6) Nothing contained in sub-sections (3 ) and (4 ) shall apply to a person who has been authorised to vote as proxy for an elector under this Act in so far as he votes as a proxy for such elector." (emphasis added)

40. Section 62 of R.P. Act, 1951, therefore, says two things together. (i) A person who is not included in electoral roll of any constituency shall not be entitled to cast vote in that constituency; and, (ii) Every person whose name is entered in electoral roll of any constituency shall be entitled to vote in that constituency. The other restrictions are that no person who is disqualified under Section 16 of R.P. Act, 1950 shall cast vote in an election in any constituency. Sub-sections (3), (4) and (5) admittedly are not attracted in the case in hand, hence I am not discussing.

41. In fact contention of petitioner is not that any of the person who cast vote suffered a disqualification referred to in Section 16 of R.P. Act, 1950, hence even Section 62(2) is also not applicable in the case in hand. Case set up by petitioner is that though name of persons were included in electoral roll but they were not correctly included in voter list being ineligible or did not satisfy the requirement for inclusion of their name in electoral roll of a Teachers' Constituency, therefore, electoral roll having been prepared incorrectly, election of respondent is liable to be set aside.

42. Question, "whether correctness of electoral roll of a constituency can be a ground to challenge election", was considered in Laxmi Kant Bajpai Vs. Hazi Yaqoob and others, 2010(4) SCC 81. One of the ground for challenging election of returned candidate, Hazi Yaqoob was improper reception of 23,431 void votes as they were from 21 localities/ colonies/ mohallas outside the territorial boundaries of constituency. Arguments advanced on behalf of Election-Petitioner was that electoral roll was prepared in violation of Article 173 of the Constitution, same is a nullity and, therefore, result of election in so far as it concerned to elected candidate, has been materially affected. The votes of the area outside assembly constituency were void, improper and illegally received as valid votes and same have materially affected result of election, therefore, election is void under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) and (iv) of R.P. Act, 1951.

43. Court considered Section 100(1)(d)(iii) which provides ground for declaring election void and reads as under:

"(iii) by the improper reception, refusal or rejection of any vote or the reception of any vote which is void."

44. The Court in Laxmi Kant Bajpai (supra) said that once an electoral roll is published it becomes a final electoral roll of the constituency. Thereafter alteration to electoral roll can only be brought about by following procedure prescribed in relevant rules. Court also refers to Section 30 of R.P. Act, 1950 barring jurisdiction of Civil Court to entertain/ adjudicate upon any question, whether any person is or is not entitled to be registered in an electoral roll for a constituency or to question legality of any action taken by or under the authority of an Electoral Registration Officer or of any decision given by any authority appointed under R.P. Act, 1950 for revision of any such roll. Having said so, Court in para 18 of judgment said:

"18. The wordings of the section are very clear and it conveys the meaning that a High Court cannot set aside an election on the ground that though the name of a candidate is in the list, it had been included therein illegally." (emphasis added)

45. Further, Court in para 19 of judgment said:

"19. It is clear from the above discussion that the Courts cannot decide any issue relating to issuance or revision of an electoral roll. The remedy lies in the procedure laid down in the prescribed rules. There is scope for challenging the contents of the electoral roll. However, once an electoral roll is finally published, it becomes final and then no court can interfere with the said publication of the electoral roll and it shall be the electoral roll of the constituency." (emphasis added)

46. In B.M. Ramaswamy vs. B.M. Krishnamurthy and others, AIR 1963 SC 458, dealing with a similar question, Court said:

".....action of the electoral registration officer in including the name of the appellant in the electoral roll, though illegal, cannot be questioned in a civil court : but it could be rectified only in the manner prescribed by law, i.e., by preferring an appeal under rule 24 of the Rules, or by resorting to any other appropriate remedy." (emphasis added)

47. In Shyamdeo Pd. Singh vs. Nawal Kishore Yadav, 2000(8) SCC 46, Court said, that inclusion of person or persons in electoral roll by an authority empowered in law to prepare electoral rolls, though they were not qualified to be so enrolled, cannot be a ground for setting aside an election of a returned candidate under Sub-clause (iii) or (iv) of Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) of Section 100 of R.P. Act, 1951. Relevant observations made by Court, read as under:

"The electoral rolls may contain error and they may remain to be corrected or the appeals in respect thereof may be pending, the electoral roll effective for the ensuing election must achieve a finality at a given point of time (such as the last date prescribed for filing the nominations). It has to be remembered that right to contest an election, a right to vote and a right to object to an ineligible person exercising right to vote are all rights and obligations created by Statute. They are not the rights in common law. Bringing into existence Houses or Institutions responsible for functioning of a democracy have a vital constitutional objective to achieve as they are so essential for the functioning of a democracy. A breach of any statutory right or obligation should not come in the way of the process directed towards fulfilling the high objective of bringing into existence of a House or Institution contemplated by Constitution as enabling democratic functioning of the country." (emphasis added)

48. In Shyamdeo Pd. Singh vs. Nawal Kishore Yadav (supra), Court further said that a person enrolled in electoral list by an authority empowered in law to prepare the electoral rolls or to include name therein, is entitled to cast a vote unless disqualified under sub-sections (2) to (5) of section 62 of R.P. Act, 1951. Court very specifically held:

"A person enrolled in the electoral roll cannot be excluded from exercising his right to cast vote on the ground that he did not satisfy the eligibility requirement as laid down in Section 19 or 27(5) of R.P. Act, 1950." (emphasis added)

49. A similar issue was considered by Constitution Bench in Nripendra Bahadur Singh vs. Jai Ram Verma and others, 1978(1) SCC 208 and Court held that finality of electoral roll cannot be challenged in an election petition even if certain irregularities had taken place in preparation of electoral roll or if subsequent disqualification had taken place and electoral roll on that score cannot be corrected before the last hour of making nominations. Court held that after dead line, electoral roll of a constituency cannot be interfered with and no one can go behind the entries except for the purpose of considering disqualification under Section 16 of R.P. Act, 1950.

50. In Baidyanath Panjira vs. Sita Ram Mahto, AIR 1970 SC 314 Court said:

"A fair reading of the various clauses in Section 27(2) will make it clear that the entries in an electoral roll of a constituency, as they stood on the last date for making the nominations for an election in that constituency should be considered as final for the purpose of that election". (emphasis added)

51. In Pampakayi Rayappa Belagali vs B.D. Jatti, AIR 1971 SC 1348, Court said:

"The entire scheme of the Act of 1950 and the amplitude of its provisions show that the entries made in an Electoral Roll of a constituency can only be challenged in accordance with the machinery provided by it and not in any other manner or before any other forum unless some question of violation of the provisions of the Constitution is involved." (emphasis added)

52. In Nripendra Bahadur Singh vs. Jai Ram Verma (supra), Court said:

"It is not disputed that the persons whose names were recorded in the electoral roll and participated in the voting were not disqualified under Section 16 of the 1950 Act. That being the position it would have been wrong on the part of the Presiding Officer not to allow the voters whose names were recorded in the electoral roll of the constituency to participate in the voting, even though their names could have been earlier at the appropriate time legitimately excluded from the electoral roll. These voters are electors within the meaning of Section 2(1) (e) of the 1951 Act and were entitled to vote under Section 62 of the 1951 Act."

53. With reference to Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of R.P. Act, 1951, Court in Nripendra Bahadur Singh (supra) said that it talks of reception of void votes but where the votes have been cast by voters whose names are included in electoral roll, those are valid voters and question of reception of any vote which is void does not arise.

54. The above binding authorities leave no option for this Court to answer Issue-7 in negative, i.e., in favour of respondent and against Election-Petitioner. I hold that a finally published voter list cannot be a ground to challenge election of a returned candidate, contending that voter lists included names of invalid and ineligible persons. Similarly, Issue-6 also stands answered against Election-Petitioner.

55. Issues-1, 2, 3 and 4 accordingly are answered by holding that correctness of a final electoral roll cannot be judged by this Court in an election petition challenging election of a returned candidate, and such challenge is impermissible.

56. In view thereof, Issue-5 is also answered against Election-Petitioner.

57. Besides, what I have held with respect to Issues-1, 2, 3 and 4, even otherwise also I find that there is lack of material particulars pleaded in election-petition in respect of allegations of inclusion of ineligible persons in election-petition and pleadings do not satisfy requirement of Order VI Rule 16 C.P.C., hence for this reason also election petition is liable to be dismissed.

58. I propose to consider Issues- 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the light of Issues-8, 9 and 10 further, whether there is material particulars pleaded and, therefore, election-petition discloses a cause of action and whether maintainable, as drafted, or not.

59. It is now well established as also requirement of procedural law that an election petition must disclose all material facts on which Election-Petitioner relies to establish existence of a cause of action. "Material facts" essentially referred to all relevant facts which an election-petitioner relies upon during course of trial. In absence of material facts and insufficient cause of action, election petition is liable to be dismissed.

60. In Samanth N Balakrishna Vs. George Fernandez, 1969(3) SCC 238, Court said that word "material" shows that the facts necessary to formulate a complete cause of action must be stated. Omission of a single material fact leads to an incomplete cause of action and statement of plaint becomes bad. The function of particulars is to present as full a picture of cause of action with further information in detail as to make the opposite party understand the case he will have to meet. There may be some overlapping between material facts and particulars but the two are quite distinct. Thus the material facts will mention that a statement of fact (which must be set out) was made and it must be alleged that it refers to character and conduct of a candidate that it is false or which the returned candidate believes to be false or does not believe to be true and that it is calculated to prejudice the chances of petitioner.

61. In Virender Nath Goutam vs Satpal Singh and others, 2007(3) SCC 617 Court said:

"All material facts, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, have to be set out in the election petition. If the material facts are not stated in a petition, it is liable to be dismissed on that ground as the case would be covered by Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 83 of the Act read with Clause (a) of Rule 11 of Order VII of the Code. The expression 'material facts' has neither been defined in the Act nor in the Code. According to the dictionary meaning, 'material' means 'fundamental', 'vital', 'basic', 'cardinal', 'central', 'crucial', 'decisive', 'essential', 'pivotal', indispensable', 'elementary' or 'primary'. [Burton's Legal Thesaurus, (Third edn.); p.349]. The phrase 'material facts', therefore, may be said to be those facts upon which a party relies for his claim or defence. In other words, 'material facts' are facts upon which the plaintiff's cause of action or the defendant's defence depends. What particulars could be said to be 'material facts' would depend upon the facts of each case and no rule of universal application can be laid down. It is, however, absolutely essential that all basic and primary facts which must be proved at the trial by the party to establish the existence of a cause of action or defence are material facts and must be stated in the pleading by the party."

62. Court also discussed in detail the distinction between "material facts' and "particulars" sand said as under:

"A distinction between 'material facts' and 'particulars', however, must not be overlooked. 'Material facts' are primary or basic facts which must be pleaded by the plaintiff or by the defendant in support of the case set up by him either to prove his cause of action or defence. 'Particulars', on the other hand, are details in support of material facts pleaded by the party. They amplify, refine and embellish material facts by giving distinctive touch to the basic contours of a picture already drawn so as to make it full, more clear and more informative. 'Particulars' thus ensure conduct of fair trial and would not take the opposite party by surprise."

63. In Mahadeorao Sukaji Shivankar vs Ramaratan Bapu and others, 2004(7) SCC 181 Court said:

"(6) Now, it is no doubt true that all material facts have to be set out in an election petition. If material facts are not stated in a plaint or a petition, the same is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone as the case would be covered by Clause (a) of Rule 11 of Order VII of the Code. The question, however, is as to whether the appellant had set out material facts in the election petition. The expression "material facts" has neither been defined in the Act nor in the Code. It may be stated that the material facts are those facts upon which a party relies for his claim or defence. In other words, material facts are facts upon which the plaintiff's cause of action or defendant's defence depends. What particulars could be said to be material facts would depend upon the facts of each case and no rule of universal application can be laid down. It is, however, absolutely essential that all basic and primary facts which must be proved at the trial by the party to establish existence of cause of action or defence are material facts and must be stated in the pleading of the party.

(7) But, it is equally well settled that there is distinction between "material facts" and "particulars". Material facts are primary or basic facts which must be pleaded by the petitioner in support of the case set up by him either to prove his cause of action or defence. Particulars, on the other hand, are details in support of material facts pleaded by the party. They amplify, refine and embellish material facts by giving finishing touch to the basic contours of a picture already drawn so as to make it full, more clear and more informative. Particulars ensure conduct of fair trial and would not take the opposite party by surprise." (emphasis added)

64. In Hari Shankar Jain vs. Sonia Gandhi, AIR 2001 SC 3689 Court said:

"Material facts required to be stated are those facts which can be considered as materials supporting the allegations made. In other words, they must be such facts as would afford a basis for the allegations made in the petition and would constitute the cause of action as understood in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The expression 'cause of action' has been compendiously defined to mean every fact which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, in order to support his right to the judgment of the Court. Omission of a single material fact leads to an incomplete cause of action and the statement of claim becomes bad. The function of the party is to present as full a picture of the cause of action with such further information in detail as to make the opposite party understand the case he will have to meet."

65. In V.S. Achutanandan vs. P.J. Francis, 1999(2) SCR 99, Court said that failure to plead "material facts" is fatal to election petition.

66. In Laxmi Kant Bajpai Vs. Hazi Yaqoob (supra), Court said:

".... it is a settled legal position that an election petition must clearly and unambiguously set out all the material facts which the appellant is to rely upon during the trial, and it must reveal a clear and complete picture of the circumstances and should disclose a definite cause of action. In the absence of the above, an election petition can be summarily dismissed. To see whether material facts have been duly disclosed or whether a cause of action arises, we need to look at the averment and pleadings taken up by the party."

67. Looking to the pleadings of election petition in the light of above discussion I now proceed to find out whether material facts and fullest possible particulars have been disclosed in election petition or not.

68. Election petitioner has filed a list of polling booths and electoral roll to show that it contains names of invalid voters but who are those invalid voters nothing has been said and pleaded in election petition at all. Even Schedule-2 and 3 appended to election petition do not disclose these facts at all.

69. Schedule 4 claims to be a list of teachers working in Junior High School and this Court finds that said list only mentions names of various teachers working in Inter Colleges, Secondary Schools but at the end of chart of list, words "Junior High School" and "Aided Junior High School" has been mentioned. It is not shown to Court as to who has done it i.e. who has mentioned those words. Moreover, Schedule-4 is a list of polling place and that by itself cannot demonstrate that voters in electoral roll who were to cast their votes in polling booths are all teachers in Junior High School. Election petition do not contain facts whatsoever to prove what has been alleged by Election-Petitioner.

70. So far as documentary evidence is concerned, I have already said that only two documents are proved and they are wholly irrelevant to prove the fact, "whether electoral rolls included names of ineligible persons as valid voters or not". As per schedule, for preparation of revision of electoral roll for Varanasi Teachers' Constituency, time of filing objection was 01.10.2013 to 30.10.2013. PW-1 has said that he filed an objection but that was filed on 17.11.2013 and not within the time prescribed in schedule. The examination-in-chief of PW-1 is by way of an affidavit wherein he has given names of various persons who according to him were ineligible to be included in voter list but in order to show that those persons were ineligible for inclusion in electoral roll for Teachers' Constituency, no material has been placed on record. If a person was appointed as part-time teacher, this fact could be proved by a document, i.e., appointment letter and not by oral assertion. Certain facts, if can be proved by a document, no evidence could be admissible to prove such a fact. Similarly, it is said that there are certain institutions which are unaided but for the purpose of inclusion of names in electoral roll for Teachers' Constituency, whether an educational institutional is aided or unaided, is irrelevant, therefore, a particular secondary institution was unaided would make no difference because teachers of such educational institution cannot be said to be ineligible to be included in electoral roll for Teachers' Constituency.

71. PW-1 has also admitted that documentary evidence which he has filed and mentioned as original copy in para 6 of his affidavit is not correct and in fact it is a photostat copy. With reference to document A35, which is dated 06.02.2014 he admits that same does not contain signatures and it also does not contain signature of any authorized person of Electoral Registration Officer.

72. Similarly, PW-2 has said that he filed objection with respect to inclusion of ineligible persons in electoral roll. The said objection is dated 06.02.2014 and last date for filing objection was 07.02.2014. However, no material has been placed to show that last date for objection was 07.02.2014. Similar statement has been given by PW-3 also. These witnesses have not shown that any objection was actually submitted to Electoral Registration Officer or any authority authorized by him, within time.

73. Evidence of other witnesses is also relating to alleged ineligible persons without placing any documentary evidence on record and moreso nothing could be shown that on or before last date of filing objection to electoral roll, any objection was filed by Election-Petitioner or any person authorized by him. Therefore, on this aspect also, in my view, election petition lacks material facts. Since there is no pleading of material particulars, hence there is no discloser of any cause of action. Even otherwise, alleged ineligibility of the persons whose names are included in electoral roll has not been substantiated at all. Therefore, aforesaid issues 1-4 and Issue-8, 9 and 10 are answered against Election Petitioner.

74. Aforesaid adjudication of issues results Issue-12 to be returned against Election-Petitioner.

75. In view thereof, this Court do not find any occasion to answer Issue-11.

76. In the result, election petition fails.

77. Dismissed accordingly with costs of Rs. 25,000/-.

Order Date :-19.09.2017

AK