RAM CHANDRA PRASAD SINGH versus SHARAD YADAV

RAM CHANDRA PRASAD SINGH versus SHARAD YADAV

The High Court did not err in rejecting the application to place additional documents because the additional evidence related to an event (formation/launch of a new party on 18.05.2018) that occurred after the petition filed on 02.09.2017 and was not the foundation for the Chairperson's order of 04.12.2017; however, the Court observed that subsequent events may be considered in a writ petition under Article 226 where they are relevant to the state of affairs as pertaining to the time when disqualification was incurred.

Parties
Appellant; Member of Parliament (rajya Sabha) and Leader of Jd(u) in Rajya Sabha: Ram Chandra Prasad Singh; Respondent; Member of Parliament (rajya Sabha) Elected on Janata Dal (united) Ticket: Sharad Yadav
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court Order in Writ Petition Under Article 226 Challenging Interlocutory Rejection of Application to Place Additional Documents / Interlocutory Appeal Against High Court Order Dated 11.09.2018 in WP (c) No. 11102 of 2017
Outcome
Appeal dismissed subject to observations regarding consideration of subsequent events in Article 226 proceedings
Legal Topics
Tenth Schedule, Defection/disqualification, Article 226, Admissibility of Subsequent Events/evidence in Writ Petition
Constitutional Law Electoral Law Tenth Schedule Defection/disqualification Article 226 Admissibility of Subsequent Events/evidence in Writ Petition

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ram Chandra Prasad Singh

Appellant; Member of Parliament (rajya Sabha) and Leader of Jd(u) in Rajya Sabha

Sharad Yadav

Respondent; Member of Parliament (rajya Sabha) Elected on Janata Dal (united) Ticket

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court Order in Writ Petition Under Article 226 Challenging Interlocutory Rejection of Application to Place Additional Documents / Interlocutory Appeal Against High Court Order Dated 11.09.2018 in WP (c) No. 11102 of 2017

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in rejecting the application to place additional documents/evidence relating to events subsequent to the Chairperson's order
  2. 2 Whether subsequent events or conduct after the Chairperson's adjudication can be considered in a writ petition under Article 226 to test legality of a disqualification order under the Tenth Schedule

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court did not err in rejecting the application to place additional documents because the additional evidence related to an event (formation/launch of a new party on 18.05.2018) that occurred after the petition filed on 02.09.2017 and was not the foundation for the Chairperson's order of 04.12.2017; however, the Court observed that subsequent events may be considered in a writ petition under Article 226 where they are relevant to the state of affairs as pertaining to the time when disqualification was incurred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed subject to observations regarding consideration of subsequent events in Article 226 proceedings

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Order dated 11.09.2018 of the High Court rejecting C.M. Application No. 27159 of 2018 upheld