The Rajasthan High Court lifts the order on the conduct of the State Dental Council elections

The division bank of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati And Justice Munnuri Laxman at the High Court of Rajasthan has allowed the special appeal filed by the Rajasthan State Dental Council, Jaipur, RUHS College of Dental Sciences (“RUHS”) against an order of the Single Judge quashing the election process for the Rajasthan State Dental Council which had commenced on on the basis of the election notification, was suspended.

The appellant’s case was that the respondent’s nomination was submitted by post and in the nomination papers the signatures of the second petitioner did not match his signature on his Dental Council membership form. When the checking officer called the second petitioner and made him sign, it also did not match his signature appearing on the respondent’s nomination form.

As a result, the Returning Officer (“RO”), after such enquiry, rejected the nomination of the respondent. Against such rejection, the respondent filed a writ petition and the single judge stayed the election process.

On the contrary, it has been submitted by counsel for the respondent that the rejection by the RO was done arbitrarily, while it was no one’s business that the signature was forged. The counsel submitted that the rejection was due to arbitrary exercise of powers by the RO to deprive the respondent’s opportunity to contest the elections.

After hearing both sides, the Court emphasized that it was an admitted fact that the respondent had not physically signed the nomination papers along with the petitioners in the presence of the RO but the same had been sent by post.

The Court held that if the nomination forms had been physically presented, signed by the respondent and both petitioners in the presence of the RO, the discrepancy between the signature of the second petitioner between the nomination of and on that of his membership form would not have been significant .

However, since it was sent by post, there was a possibility that the signature of the second petitioner on the nomination forms was forged. In this light, the subsequent acceptance of his signature by the second petitioner became insignificant at the time of examination.

Accordingly, the Court held that in the light of the above facts and analysis, it could be noted that the respondent (original writ petitioner) had no prima facie case for an interim injunction to the effect that the election would be stayed.

Therefore, the special appeal was allowed quashing the stay order passed by the Single Judge.

Title: Rajasthan State Dental Council, Jaipur, RUHS College of Dental Sciences v. Lalit Jeila and Ors.

Quote: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 446

Click here to read/download the order