PARSRAM AND ANR. versus SHIVCHAND AND ORS.

PARSRAM AND ANR. versus SHIVCHAND AND ORS.

The Supreme Court held that it is not open to the Court to determine by evidence whether 'Mochi' and 'Chamar' are the same caste for purposes of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 in Punjab. The question is within the exclusive power of the President under Article 341. Since 'Mochi' is not specified as a Scheduled Caste for Punjab but 'Chamar' is, a person proved to be a 'Mochi' is ineligible for a seat reserved for 'Chamar.' Evidence to show synonymity or inclusion is inadmissible; the nomination's rejection was therefore proper.

Parties
Appellant: Parsram; Respondent: Shivchand
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 November 1968
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Under S. 116 a of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 / Supreme Court of India Judgment on Appeal From Punjab and Haryana High Court, Election Petition 14 of 1967
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Scheduled Castes Under Article 341, Interpretation of Presidential Orders Under Article 341, Nomination Paper Rejection in Election Law
Constitutional Law Election Law Scheduled Castes Under Article 341 Interpretation of Presidential Orders Under Article 341 Nomination Paper Rejection in Election Law

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Parsram

Appellant

Shivchand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Under S. 116 a of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 / Supreme Court of India Judgment on Appeal From Punjab and Haryana High Court, Election Petition 14 of 1967

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Returning Officer wrongly rejected the nomination paper of Kishan Lal on caste grounds
  2. 2 Whether 'Mochi' and 'Chamar' are the same caste under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 in Punjab

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that it is not open to the Court to determine by evidence whether 'Mochi' and 'Chamar' are the same caste for purposes of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 in Punjab. The question is within the exclusive power of the President under Article 341. Since 'Mochi' is not specified as a Scheduled Caste for Punjab but 'Chamar' is, a person proved to be a 'Mochi' is ineligible for a seat reserved for 'Chamar.' Evidence to show synonymity or inclusion is inadmissible; the nomination's rejection was therefore proper.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Nomination paper of Kishan Lal rightly rejected; election result affirmed; appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.