Dr. Govind Singh vs Mr. Jyotiraditya M. Scindia
2021 Latest Caselaw 1533 MP

                            1                     E.P.No.2/2020

          HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                BENCH AT GWALIOR
          SB: Hon.Shri Justice S.A.Dharmadhikari

                  Election Petition No.02/2020
                          Dr.Govind Singh
                                  Vs.
                Jyotiraditya M.Scindia and others
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Kuber Boddh, learned counsel for the petitioner.
No one appears for respondent No.1.
Shri Alok Katare, learned counsel for the respondents No.2
and 3.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           ORDER

23/04/2021

Written statement has been filed on behalf of the

respondent No.1 on 17.02.2021.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that copy of the

written statement has not been supplied to him.

3. Counsel for the respondent No.1 is directed to supply

copy of the written statement to the counsel for the

petitioner within a period of one week.

4. Heard on I.A.No.2/2021, an application for deleting

the name of respondent No.2 - Election Commission of

India and respondent No.3 - Chief Electoral Officer.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3

submits that in the instant election petition the petitioner has

challenged the election of respondent No.1, who had been

declared as a returned candidate from Madhya Pradesh in

the Biennial Elections to the Council of States (Rajya

Sabha) in the parliamentary election held on 19.06.2020.

Learned counsel submits that Section 82 of the

Representation of People Act, 1951 provides for the person

who can be joined as respondent to the petition. Respondent

No.2 and 3 are not the proper parties to be joined in the

Election Petition, inasmuch as no relief has been claimed

against them. They have discharged their duties as per the

provisions of the Act, therefore, they can not be impleaded

as party. Leaned counsel has also relied on the various

judgments of the Apex Court viz. Jyoti Basu Vs. Debi

Ghosal reported in AIR 1982 SC 983, B.Sundara Rami

Reddy Vs. Election Commission of India and others

reported in 1991 Suppl (2) SCC 624, Michael

BB.Fernandes Vs. C.K.Jafar Sharief reported in AIR

2002 SC 1041, which conclusively settled the issue as to

who can be joined as respondent to the election petition.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner

admits that no relief whatsoever has been claimed against

the respondents No.2 and 3. In such a situation, appropriate

orders may be passed.

7. Taking into consideration the settled legal position

and the fact that no relief has been claimed against

respondents no.2 and 3, I.A.No.2/2021 is allowed. Learned

counsel for the petitioner is directed to delete the name of

respondents No.2 and 3 from the array of the respondents

within period of one week. Counsel for the petitioner is also

granted a week's time to comply with the order

dt.27.08.2020.

List this case after ten days.

(S.A.Dharmadhikari) Judge SP

SANJEEV KUMAR PHANSE 2021.04.25 08:43:20 +05'30'