DEWAN JOYNAL ABEDIN versus ABDUL WAZED ALIAS ABDUL WAZAD MIAH AND TWO OTHERS.

DEWAN JOYNAL ABEDIN versus ABDUL WAZED ALIAS ABDUL WAZAD MIAH AND TWO OTHERS.

A lease agreement for collection of tolls under the Northern India Ferries Act, 1878 does not constitute a contract for execution of works nor does it amount to holding an office of profit under the State Government; the respondent was not disqualified under section 9-A or Article 191(1)(a). The rejection of his nomination papers was improper, and the election was rightly set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Dewan Joynal Abedin; Respondent: Abdul Wazed alias Abdul Wazed Miah; Respondent: Bazlul Basil; Respondent: M. Bhattacharjee
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 December 1987
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauhati High Court Election Petition Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disqualification Under Representation of the People Act, Office of Profit, Election Petition, Improper Rejection of Nomination
Election Law Constitutional Law Disqualification Under Representation of the People Act Office of Profit Election Petition Improper Rejection of Nomination

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dewan Joynal Abedin

Appellant

Abdul Wazed alias Abdul Wazed Miah

Respondent

Bazlul Basil

Respondent

M. Bhattacharjee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauhati High Court Election Petition Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was disqualified under section 9-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 by virtue of a government contract for ferry tolls
  2. 2 Whether the contract constituted an agreement for execution of works or amounted to holding an office of profit under the State Government
  3. 3 Whether the respondent had completed 25 years of age as required by Article 173(b) of the Constitution on the date of nomination

Ratio Decidendi

A lease agreement for collection of tolls under the Northern India Ferries Act, 1878 does not constitute a contract for execution of works nor does it amount to holding an office of profit under the State Government; the respondent was not disqualified under section 9-A or Article 191(1)(a). The rejection of his nomination papers was improper, and the election was rightly set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Election of the appellant set aside
  • No costs; parties to bear own costs