REGISTERED No. D.L. 33001/99

The Gazette of India

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

No. 40]

NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2001/PAUSA 8, 1923

Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed

as a separate compilation.

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (iii)

Orders and Notifications issued by Central Authorities (other than the Administrations of Union Territories)

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

New Delhi, the 3rd December, 2001

O.N. 162.—In pursuance of Section

106 of the

Representation of the People

Act,

1951; (43 of

1951), the Election Commission hereby publishes the

judgement dated 20-8-2001 of the High

Court of

judicature at Mumbai in Election Petition No. 17 of

1999 filed by Shri Sandipan Bhagwant Thorat chal-

lenging the election of Shri Ramdas Bandu Athavale

to the Lok Sabha from 38-Pandharpur (SC) Parlia-

mentary Constituency.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT

MUMBAI

ORIGINAL ORDINARY CIVIL JURISDICTION

Election Petition No. 17 of 1999

Shri Sandipan Bhagwant Thorat,

Residing at 6/1, Yashwant

Co-op. Hsg. Society, Kumthanaka,

Solapur.

Petitioner.

3855 GI/2001 —1

(457)

4 5B rm <ftuem OF INBJA : DECEMBER 29, 2OOI/FAUSA &, 1923

11—$ac. $cmi

V/s.

Shri Ramdas Bandu Athavalc,

Resident of World Bank Project,

Charkop, Sector-2, Plot No. 33,

Sharada Niwas, Kandivli(W),

Mumbai-400067.

...Respondent.

Mr. S. G. Aney with Mr. R. A. Kumbhakoni

i/b Arnit Borkar for the Petitioner.

Mr.Anil Y. Sakhare with Mr. Nitin V. Pradhan

with Mr, Sangharaj D. Rupwate with Mr.

L. M. Acharya with Ms. Shubhada Khot

i/b M/s. Harcsh Mehta and Co. for the

Respondent.

CORAM : D. K. Deshmukh, J

Dated : 20th August, 2001

ORAL ORDER:

1. This petition has been filed under the provisions

of Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act,

1951, challenging the election of the Respondent as

a member of the Lok Sabha from the Pandharpur

constituency, which is reserved for the candidates be-

longing to the scheduled caste. The result of the elec-

tion was declared on 7-10-1999. The Petitioner and

the Respondent were candidates at the election. The

Respondent had claimed, in his nomination paper thai

he belongs to Mahar Caste, which

is a scheduled

caste.

2. The Petitioner, in the petition, claims that the

Respondent does not belong to Mahar caste.

claims that the Respondent does not belong to sche-

duled caste, therefore, he was not eligible to be a

candidate from the Pandharpur CofisthXlency. Accord-

ing to the Petitioner, the date on which Act No. 15

of 1990. which amends the Constitution (Scheduled

Castes) Order, 1950 came into force, the Respondent

was already professing Buddhist religion, Iherefore,

he cannot

claim that he belongs to the

scheduled

C3te.

3. The Respondent opposes the Petition. He claims

that he belongs to Mahar caste. He submits that in

support of his claim he had submitted a caate cefti-

Ficr.tc issued by competent authority and therefore the

returning officer accepted his nomination paper, tfe

submits that becaircc he belongs to Maiiar caste, which

is a scheduled caste, though he professed Buddhist

religion, he is entitled to contest ffom the Pahdhntpur

constituency, because of the amendment brought about

by Act No. 15 of 1990 in the Constitution (Scheduled

Castes') Order, 1950. He claims that this a frivolous

petition, therefore, the petition should be dismissed with

exemplary costs,

4. The Petitioner, apart from examining some wit-

nesses for production of documents, has examined

himself as a witness. The Respondent has not led any

oral evidence.

5. r^i-n*n the rival pleadings and documents fottew-

ing issues arise :

(i) Does the Petitioner prove that the Respon-

dent does not belong to Mahar caste ?

(ii) Does the Petitioner prove, even

assuming

that the Respondent belongs to Mahar caste,

that he cannot claim to be belonging to the

Scheduled caste, because he was professing

Buddhist religion before the commencement

of Act No. 15 of 1990 ?

(iii) Does the Respondent prove that the Petition

should be dismissed with exemplary costs ?

6. Issue No. 1 : In the Petition, the Petitioner claims

that the Respondent does not belong to Mahar caste.

The only evidence that he has led is that the Respon-

dent in his biographical sketch submitted as a mem-

ber of the 12th Lok Sabha, had claimed that he was

born on 25-12-1959 at village Agalgaon. The Peti-

tioner, therefore, applied for a copy of the birth certi-

ficate of the Respondent with the authorities, but the

authorities informed him that they do not have any

record

showing that the Respondent was born at

Agftlgaon <m 25-12-1959. Therefore, l.he Petitioner

claims that the Respondent does not belong to Mahar

caste. In the face of the f*<* that the Respondent hud

submitted caste certificate of competent authority certi-

fying that he belongs to Mahar caste, the evidence

led by the Petitioner does not show that the Respon-

dent does not belong to the Mahar caste. The burden

of leading evidence, to prove that the Respon-

dent does not belong to Mahar caste, was on the

Petitioner. He has not at all discharged that burdeD.

It appears from the material on record that in the

Who's Who of the 12th Lok Sabha, the date of birth

was mcntioHed as 25-12-1959, while according to the

Respondent his correct date of birth i& 25-112-1949.

The Petitioner applied for copy of the birth certificate

ol the Respondent on ihe basis of the date 25-12-59.

The authorities informed him that they do not have

the record and from this the Petitioner jumped to the

conclusion that the Respondent does not belong to

Mahar caste. This is clear from the following state-

ment made by the Petitioner in his deposition.

"I have filed this petition claiming that the Res-

pondent does not belong to Mahar caste only on the

basis that I did not find the entries about the Res-

pondent's birth in the office at Kauthe Mahankal."

The answer to the issue No. 1, is therefore, in the

negative.

7. Issue No. 2 : It is submitted by the Petitioner

that though th« Respondent belongs to Mahnr caste,

he professes Byddhkt religion, therefore, as per the

provision of the Constitution

(Scheduled

Castes)

Order, 1950, he is not entitled to claim that he belongs

to scheduled caste. It is further submitted that because

of the amendment brought about by Act No. 15 of

1990, in the 1950 Order a person professing Budflhist

religion can also belong to the Scheduled

Caste,

but that person should either be form or converted

to Buddhist religion after the commencement of Act

No. 15 of 1990. It is submitted that the benefit of

Act No. 15 of 1990 is not available to the persons

who were already professing Buddhist religion, when

Act No. 15 of 1990 came into force. It is submitted

that as per the provision of Article 330 of the Cons-

titution, the number of seats reserved for the Sche-

duled Castes in a State should, as nearly as may be,

459

bear saoje proportion to the total number of scats

allotted tq that State in Lok Sahfaa, as the population

of the Scheduled Caste in that State to the total popu*

latioa of that State. In other wprds, the number of

seats to be reserved fronj a State depends on the

population of the scheduled c*stes in that State. It

is submitted, initially from the State of Maharashtra

6 Lok Sabha seats were reserved foe scheduled castes.

In 1956, a large population <al persons belonging to

the castes which were scheduled castes in the State

of Maharashtra, converted to Buddhism, as a conse-

quence, theae persons ceased to be scheduled caste

as per the provision of 1950 Scheduled Castes Order,

therefore the number of seats reserved for scheduled

castes from Maharashtra was reduced from 6 to 3.

It is submitted that if the, amendment brought about

by Act No. 15 of 1990 is taken to mean that even

the persons who had converted to Buddhism, before

1990 are aho entitled to claim that they belong to

the scheduled caste, then the number of seats re-

served for scheduled castes from the Stnte of Maha-

rashtra would have to be increased, but that has

not been done after Act No. 15 of 1990 was enact-

ed. Therefore, according to the Petitioner, the bene-

fit of Act No. 1'5 of 1990 is not available to the

persons who were already converted to Buddhism,

when Aet No. 15 of 1990 came into force.

ft. It is clear that die submissions has no subs-

tance

and perusst of following provision* makes

that obvious :

Articles 330 (1) and (2) of the ConstiUiLon

of India leads as under :

330. Reservation of seats tor Scheduled Castes

and Scheduled Tribes in the House of the

People :—(1) Seats shall be reserved in

the House of the People for—

(a) the Scheduled Castes ;

(b) the Scheduled Tribes except the Sche-

duled Tribes in the autonomous districts

of Assam; and

districts -of Assam.

(2) The number of seats reserved in any State

(or Union

territory)

for the

Scheduled

Castes or the Scheduled Tribes under

clause (1) shall bear, as nearly as may be,

the same proportion, to the total number

of sears allotted to that State (or Union

territory) in the House of the People as

the population of the Scheduled Castes in

the

Stat« (or/ Union territory) or of the

Scheduled Tribes in the State (or Union

.territwpy} or part of tfec State (or Union

teKitdiy), as the case may be, in respect of

which seats are so reserved, hears- to the

Wai population

af the State (or Union

territ«yX

Article 341 of ti«s Constitution of India reads

,as under Scrieduled Castes.—(1) the Presi-

dent (may with respect to, any State) (or

Union territory), and'where it is a (State***

after consultation

with the Governor***

tfawnoD. by pubjic notification, specify the

castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups

within castes, races or tribes which shall

for the purpose of

this Constitution be

deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation

to that State (or Union territory, as the

case may be).

(2> Parliament may by law include in or ex-

clude from the list of Scheduled Castes speci-

fied in a notification issued under clause (1)

any caste, race or tribe or part of or group

within any caste, race or tribe, but save

as aforesaid a notification issued under the

said clause shall not be varied by any sub-

sequent notification.

Article (2) & (3) of the Constitution (Scheduled

Castes)

Order,

1950 after

amendment

reaxla :•—

(2) Subject to the provisions of this O*dcr,

the castes, races or tribes or parts of,

or groups within, castes or tribtts speci-

fied in [Parts to (XII)* of the Schedule

to this order, shall, i« relation to the

States to which those parts respectively

relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Caste?

so far as regards member thereof resident

in the localities speeded in relation to

them io those parts of that Schedule.

(3) Notwithstanding

anything

contained in

paragraph 2, no person who professes a

religion different from the Hinidji (the

Sikh or the Buddhist

religion shall be

dteerned to be a member of a Scheduled

Caste.).

Article (2) & (3) of t&j Constitution (Scheduled

Castes) Ouder, 1950

before amendment

reads :—

<2) Subject to the provisions of this Older,

the castes, r^ces or tribes or parts of, or

groups within, castes or tribes specified

in [Parts to (XXII)] of the Schedule to

this order shall, in relation to the States

to which those Parts respectively relate,

be deemed to be Scheduled Castes so far

.as regards member thereof resident in the

localities specified in relation to them in

those pafts of tbat Schedule.

(3) Notwithstanding

anything

contained In

paragraph 2, no person who professes a

religion different from the Hindu or the

Sikh religion shaH be doetoed To be a

member of a (Scheduled Castes).

Section 3 of the Representation of the People Act,

1950:^

Allocation of seats in the Mouse of the People.—

The allocation of seats to the States in the

House of the People and the number of

seafH, if any, to be reserved for the Sche-

duled Cartes and for the Scheduled Tribes

Or each State shall be as shown in the First

Schedule.

9. It is appMtent from the abov« enacted provisions

that Articl* 390 toys town fo<* principle on the basis

460

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 29', 2001/FAUSA 8, 1923

[PART II—SEC. 3(UJ)]

of which the seats in the Lok Sabha are to be reserv-

ed for the Scheduled Castes, however it vests in the

Parliament the power to make the law¹ providing for

reservation of the actual number of seats in each

State. The number of seats to be reserved for Sche-

duled Castes depends on the population of the Sche-

duled Castes in the State.

Now, if the Parliament

does not increase the number of seats reserved for the

Scheduled Castes in the State, it does not mean that

in fact there is no increase in the population of Sche-

duled Castes in tlhe State. It is clear from the provi-

sions of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order,

1950, before the 1990 amendment that a person who

belongs to a caste which is included in the list of

' Scheduled Castes in the 1950 Order was not entitled

to claim that he belongs to the Scheduled Caste, if he

professed Buddhist religion, but as a result of tlhe 1990

amendment he can do so. The language of the 1990

amendment is clear. There is nothing in lhat provi-

sion which would even suggest that, if a person who

belongs to a caste mentioned in the list of Scheduled

Caste? in the 1950 Order was professing Buddhist

religion on the date of the commencement of the

amendment is not entitled to claim that he belongs to

the Scheduled Caste.

The Respondent belongs to

Mahar caste, which is mentioned in the list of Sche-

duled Castes given in the Constitution

(Scheduled

Caste) Order, 1950 and was professing Buddhist re-

. ligion on the date on which 1990 amendment came

into force, therefore, he is entitled to claim that he

belongs to Scheduled Caste. Therefore, Issue No. 2 is

snswered in the negative.

10. Issue No. III.—It is cleir from the material on

record that the Petitioner filed this Petition for two

reasons, namely, (1) that on the basis of the date of

birth of the Respondent mentioned in who's who of

the 12th Lok Sabha he could not get a copy of the

birth certificate of the Respondent and (2) the Par-

liament did not increase the number of seats reserved

for the Scheduled Castes in Lok Sabha from Maha-

rashtra after the 1990 amendment in the Scheduled

Castes Order. Looking at the matter from any point

of view, it cannot be said that these two reasons are

enough for anybody to file a petition in the High

Court challenging the election of a member of Lok

Sabha, who is elected by n large majority. Though,

in the petition it is claimed that the Respondent is

not Mahar by caste, no attempt was made to lead

any evidence to establish the same. The Petitioner

himself was the member of the Lok Sabha, when Bill

No. V of 1990 to amend clause 3 of the Constitution

(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 was considered by

the Lok Sabha. The statement of objects and reasons

of the Bill reads as under:—•

STATEMENT OF OBIECTS AND REASONS

"Neo-Buddhists" are a religious group which

has come into existence in 1956 as a result

of a wave of conversions, of the Scheduled

Castes under the leadership-at Dr. Babasaheb

Ambedkar. Upon conversion to Buddhism,

they- became ineligible for statutory conces-

sions like reservation in services and of seats

in Parliament and State

Assemblies and

non-statutory concessions

like educational

scholarship. Various' demands Trave been

nWdis tram time¹ to. tlnltf/fctf extending all

the concessions and facilities available to

the Scheduled Castes to them also on the

ground that change of religion has not alter-

ed their social and economic conditions. As

a matter of fact, non-statutory concessions

of the Central Government available to the

Scheduled Castes have been extended to

Neo-Buddhists. As they objectively deserve

to be treated as the Scheduled Castes for

the purpose of various reservations, it is

proposed to amend the Presidential Orders

to include them therein.

2. Hence this Bill.

It is reasonable to assume that as a member of

Lok Sabha at the relevant time, who himself belongs

to Scheduled Caste, the Petitioner knew that the 1990

Amendment was brought about to extend the bene-

fits which are available to the members of the Sche-

duled Castes to the people like the Respondent. Still

his filed this Petition. The¹ conduct of the Petitioner

of filing this Petition and pursuing it, can not be said

to be either reasonable or bonafide. It is basic tenet

of democracy that the verdict of the people expressed

through the ballot box is to be respected. The Res-

pondent has been elected by a large majority. The

remedy provided by the statute to challenge the elec-

tion cannot be resorted to unless the person filing

the Petition has a genuine reason to do so. The remedy

can not be resorted to casually or lightly. In these

circumstances, therefore, when court finds that a per-

son has filed the Petition without a reasonable cause,

casually, it becomes the duty of the Court, not only to

dismiss the Petition, but also to make such order, as

would discourage the others from filling such Petitions

in Court. The power to impose exemplary costs has

been vested in the Court for that purpose. Before the

hearing of the Petition commenced, on finding that

the Petition appears to be lacking substance, I had

made it clear to the Petitioner that he should make all

efforts to ilead evidence to substantiate his case stated

in the Petition and if he fails to do so, he will have

to pay heavy costs. Still the Petitioner, as observed

above, did not make even an attempt to lead evidence

to prove that the Respondent

does not belong to

Mahar caste. In this background, therefore, in my

opinion, exemplary costs are to be imoosed on the

Petitioner. The costs are quantified at Rs. 25,000.

The Petition is, therefore, dismissed with costs as

directed above.

[No. 82/MT-HP/17/99 (Mumbai)]

By Order,

C. R. BRAHMAM, Secy.

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 21st December, 2001

O.N. 163.—In Commission's Otfft*¹ No. 76|BR-

LAI200Q, dated 7th November, 2001" (English ver-

.sion) at page 2 entry made against "SI! No. 5", for

the 'existing entry in column 4, the entry "Sh. Ram

Birksh Chaudhary SoShri

RijhaWarii

Chaudhary,

Vill. and P.O. Behta, Vm-Janakpur Road, District

Sitamarhi, Bihar" shall be, substituted,,

" ..[No. 761BR-LA|20001

'» -«.

By Order,

OHAMSHVXM KHOHAR, Secy.

457

Whereas, the said candidates have either not furnished any reason or explanation for the said failure even

after due notice or the Election Commission after considering the representation made by them, if any, is satisfied

that they have no good reason or justification for the said failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of Section 10A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the

persons specified in column (3) of the Table below to be disqualified for being chosen as and for being a member

of either House of the Parliament or the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State/Union Territory

for a period of three years from the date of this Order,

TABLE

SI.

No.

Number and Name of

Assembly Constituency

11—Kalchini (ST)

13—Falakata(SC)

14—Madarihat (ST)

15—Dhupguri (SQ

16—Nagrakata (ST)

18—Mal(ST)

Names of contesting candidates

Sh. Madan Kumar Lama,

Central Doors TE,

P.O. : Panabasti,

District : Jalpaiguri,

Pin 735 226,

West Bengal.

Sh. Nagendranath Roy,

Vill. : Munsipara,

P.O. : Salkumarhat,

Dist. : Jalpaiguri,

Pin 736 204,

West Bengal.

Sri Salinath Craon,

Vill. : DalgacnBasti,

P.O. : Dhulagaon,

District ; Jalpaiguri,

Pin 735 216,

West Bengal.

Sri Mono Mohan Ray,

Vill. : Baroghoria,

P.O. : Bidyasharam,

District : Jalpaiguri,

West Bengal.

Sri Godliva Kujur,

Gairkata Tea Garden,

P.O. : Gairkata,

P.S. : Banarhat,

Jalpaiguri,

West Bengal.

Sh. Nepal Marandi,

Vill, : Paschim Dangapara,

P.O. : Garialtari,

P.S. : Dhupguri,

Jalpaiguri,

West Bengal.

Sri Kapil Kumar Tamba,

Jyoti Colony,

Notiali Batabari (1 No.),

P.O. : Chalsa,

P.S. : Metelli,

District : Jalpaiguri,

West Bengal.

Reason for disqualification

Account not Lodged at all.

Account not lodged at all.

Account not Lodged at all.

468

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER'29, 2001/PAtSA 8, 1923

[PART H—Sic. 3(flJ)]

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

21—Rajganj (SC)

50—Farakka

51—Aurangabad

53—Sagardighi (SC)

54—Jangipur

57—Nabagram

60~Domkal

60—Domkal

61—Naoda

62—Hariharpara

Sri Bidycswar Roy,

Chobabhita,

Phulbari,

West Bengal.

Dr, Nurul Islam,

Vill. + P.O. : Mahadevnagar,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Nurul Islam,

Vill. : Khejurtala,

Post: Kankuria,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Badrul,

Vill. : Kamalpur,

P.O. : Nimtita,

District : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Debesh Das,

Vill. : Jyogpur,

P.O. : Dohalidangapra,

District: Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Abdus Samad,

Vill. : Raghunathpur,

Post : Jangipur,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Sukumar Marjit,

Vill. & P.O. : Nabagram,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Baijid Hossain,

Vill. & P.O. : Domkal.

Murshidabad,

West Bengal,

Sri Brindabon Haldar,

Vill. & P.O. : Kaliganj,

Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Satendra Nath Dey,

Vill. & P.O. : Andulberia,

P.S. : Rejinagar,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Sohidurjjaman Biswas;

Vill. ; Shibnagar,

P.O. : Shibnagar Laskarpur,

P.S. : Domkal,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Account not Lodge4 at ajl.

Account not Lodged, at all.

Account not Lodged at all.

- 4&9

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

62—Hariharpara

64—Beldanga

65—Kandi

65.—Kandi

66—Khargram (SC)

86—Gaighata

Sri Kamrujjaman Khondekftr (Baku)),

Vill. : Nazirpur,

P.O. : Gajanipur,

Distt : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Benu Saudagar,

P.O. & P.S. : Beldanga (Dakshinapara),

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri S. K. Haidar Ali,

Vill. & P.O. : Kazisaha,

P.S. : Beldanga,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Abdul Aziz S. K.,

Khagraghat Station Road,

P.O. : Radharghat,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Manowar Hossain $. K.,

Vill. : Lokepur,

P.O. : Basudevkhali,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

West Bengal.

Sri Swapan Das,

Vill. : Jcmo Raghunathpur,

P.O. : Jemo Rajbati,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

Pin—742 140,

West Bengal.

Sri Prabal Kanti Singha Roy,

Alupatti,

P.O. : Kandi,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

Pin-742 137,

West Bengal.

Sri Pratyush Kumar Saha,

Vill. + P.O. : Kagram,

Via Salar,

P.S. : Salar,

Distt. : Murshidabad,

Pin—742 403,

West Bengal.

Sri Pijusjot Roy,

Purbasha Pafk,

Block^fB\

Gorbordanga,

North 24-Parjjanas,

West Bengal.

Account not Lodged at til.

Account not Lodged at all.

470

THE GAZETTE OF iNtWA : DECEMBER 29, 2001/PAUSA 8, 1923

[PAXT H--3EC. 3fili)l

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

91—Rajarhat (SC)

92—Deganga

140—Cossipur

142—Jorabagan

142—Jarabagan

142—Jorabagan

143—Jorasanko

Ms. Swapna Biswas,

Aswininagar,

Saradapally,

Baguihati,

Kolkata—700 059,

West Bengal.

Sri Ashim Dcbnath,

Vill. & P.O. : Prafulla Nagar,

Habra,

North 24-Parganas,

West Bengal.

Sri Idris Ali,

5. Ripon Lane,

Kolkata—700 016.

West Bengal.

Sri Paritosh Mukherjee,

27, Gokul Mitra Lane,

Kolkata—5,

West Bengal.

Sri Birendra Kumar Modi

I, Netai Haider Street.

Kolkata-700 007,

West Bengal.

Sri. Biswabasu Mukherjee,

140, Balaram.Day Street,

Kolkata-7000 06,

West Bengal.

Sri Dinesh Kumar Rateria,

13A, Prasanna Kumar Tagore Street,

Kolkata-700 006,

West Bengal.

Sri Gopal Tiwari,

80/2, Pathuria, Ghat Street,

Kolkata-700 006,

West Bengal.

Sri Subhash Roy,

21C, Mohanlal Street,

Kolkata-700 004,

West Bengal.

Sri Subhash Chandra Sharma,

45, Sir Hariram Goenka Street,

Kolkata-700 007,

West Bengal.

Sri Abhay Sankar Roy,

41, Radha Madhab,

Sana Lane, 1st Floor, Kolkata-7

West Bengal.

Sri Khalid Man,

145B, F-Ist Chitta Ranjan Avenue,

Kolkata-7,

West Bengal.

Account not Lodged at all.

Account not Lodged at all

471

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

[4?:

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

143-Jorasanko

143-Jora8anko

143-Jorasanko

144-Bara Bazar

145-Bow Bazar

153-Entally

154-Taltala

Sri Manoj Seth,

11/1 A, Baranashi Ghosh,

2nd Lane, Kolkata-7,

West Bongal.

Sri Narosh Chandra Sharma,

88B, Madan Mohan Burman Street,

1st Floor, Kolkata-7,

West Bongal.

Sri Radhyashyam Ringhcshya,

9B, Srinath Roy Lane,

Kolkata-7,

West Bengal.

Sri Ravi Jaipuria,

23, F-3, Rupchand Roy Street,

Kolkata-7,

West Bengal.

Sti Jag Narayan Thakur,

180, Mahatma Gandhi Road,

Kolkata-700 007,

West Bengal.

Sri Kamal Chowdhury,

113/A, Mohohar Das Street,

Ftolkata-7, West Bengal

Sri Qamniddin Qurashi,

10, Harin Bari, 1st Lane,

Kolkata-73, West Bengal

Sri Dilip Kumar Datta,

38, Indian Mirror Street,

Kolkata-700 013, West Bengal

Sri Rathindra Nath Bhatta Charya

34/1 A, Jeliapara Lane,

Kolkata-700 012, West Bengal

Sri Sumanta Bhowmik,

30/2/8, Doctor Lane,

Kolkata-700 014, West Bengal

Sri Sultan Osman,

12, Jakaria Street,

Kolkata-700073,

West Bengal

Sri Biplab Das,

7/1, Pottery Road,

Kolkata-700 015, West Bengal

Sri Naiayan Saha,

75/A, Sambhu Babu Lant,

Kolkata-700 014, West Bengal

Sri Vinod Hela,

3B, Chatii Babu Lane,

Kolkata-700014, West Bengal

Account not Lodged at all

Account not Lodged at al!

Account not Lodged at all

Account not Lodged at ell

Account not Lodged at all

475 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 29, 3OQ1/#W«<M, 1023

fiwt

H—Sife. S(fli)l

54.

55.

56.

57.

158-Burtola.

158-Bmtola

159-Maniktola

233-Bacduan (ST)

Sri Gopal Barick,

243A/11/43, A.P.C. Road,

Kolkata-700006, West Bengal

Sri Tridip Roy,

IOD, Seven Tanks Lane,

Kolkata-700030, West Bengal

Sri Kamalendu Hazra,

107, Bidhan Nagar Road,

LIG Housing, Block-1, Flat-24,

Kolkata-700067, West Bengal

Sri Nilmohan Murmu,

Vtll. - Sirisgora, Post-Band wan,

Distt. : Purulia, Pin-723129

West Bengal

Account not Lodged at all

Account not Lcdged at all

New Delhi, the 18tb December, 2001

O.N. 165.—In pursuance of Section 106 of the

representation of the PcopleAct, 1951 (43 of 1951), the

Eleclion Commission of India hertby publishes the

order of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated

13th September, 2001 in Election Petition No. 6 of

IP98 filed by Shri Dayanand Sahay calling in qustion

the election of Shri ()aya Singh as a Member of

Council of Slates from the State os Bihar.

[No. 76/WB-LA/200I]

By Order,

BABU RAM, Secy.

In the H-gh Court of Judicature at Patna

Order Sheet

E.P. No. 6 of 1998

Daya Nand Sahay

,. —Petitioner

Versus

Gaya Singh and others

—Respondents.

Serial

Date of

Order with

Office notes as to

No. of Order.

Signature

action

(if any)

. Order.

taken on

order

44. 13-9-2001, In view of judgement of the Apex

Court passed in Civil Appeal No. 3538 of 2000

this petition has become, infructuons.

In the result, this petition is dismissed as being

infructuous.

$&h M. L. Visa.

True copy.

For Joint Registrar.

Patna High Court.

[No. 82/CS/BR-6/98/2001]

By Order,

SHARAN PAL SINGH, Secy.

Printed by the Manager, Govt. of India Presa, Rin« Road, New Dclhi-110064

pud Published by the Controller at Publication*, Delhl-110054, 2001