BHUBANESWAR: In a major setback to the Biju Janata Dal (BJD), the Supreme Court on Friday upheld the decision of the Orissa High Court which had set aside the election of Independent MLA from Athagarh Ramesh Rout saying that the rejection of the nomination papers of his BJD rival Ranendra Pratap Swain in 2009 election was illegal. While the Opposition parties were quick to criticise the BJD managers for trying to influence the poll process even at the nomination level, Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik said he will discuss the matter with colleagues in his party.BJD dissident and former minister Damodar Rout, however, praised the judiciary and said the court is the only forum which protects a common man against the excesses of power and money. Demanding action against those who were involved in rejecting the nomination paper of Swain, the former minister said there should be an inquiry into the source of Ramesh Rout’s money with the help of which he fought a case up to the Supreme Court. Orissa Pradesh Congress Committee (OPCC) president Niranjan Patnaik also hinted that powerful forces in the BJD were financing Rout’s legal expenses. Who is behind Rout, Niranjan asked. Leader of Opposition Bhupinder Singh said the judgment has exposed how the BJD tries to influence elections even at the nomination level. With the Supreme Court judgment, the political parties are faced with another bypoll. The question now is, whether Swain will be given a ticket by the BJD or will he contest as an Independent candidate with support from the Opposition. The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices R M Lodha and Jagdish Singh Kehar observed that the consideration of the matter by the High Court does not suffer from any illegal infirmity. “We see no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeals accordingly fail and are dismissed with no order as to costs,” the Bench said. The order came on two poll petitions of the winning candidate Rout, whose election was set aside by the High Court. The High Court had held that the rejection of the nomination papers of Swain, a four-time MLA and the official candidate of the ruling BJD, was not in consonance with law. The returning officer had rejected Swain’s nomination papers on the ground that he had failed to furnish Form A and Form B along with his first set of nomination papers, which were duly signed in ink by the authorised officer of the BJD, which had given him the ticket.
Comments
0 comment