Advanced Search Search Tips
View Complete document
P. Ravindra Reddy And Ors. vs The Election Commission, Rep. By ... on 29 November, 1994
Showing the contexts in which ravindra appears in the document
Change context size

5. The Superintendent of Police, Sri A. Sivanarayana, IPS submitted a report about the incident of 8-11-1994 and set out therein that Sri K. Siddaiah who was a practising Advocate of Anantapur, was given Congress (I) Ticket to contest from 163, Gorantla Assembly Constituency and the sitting M.L.A., Sri Ravindra Reddy of Pamudurthi who was aspiring for Congress (I) Ticket, could not get it. He, therefore, decided to file his nomination as an independent candidate and for that purpose he and his followers assembled at the office of Mandal Revenue Officer on 8-11-1994. In the meantime, at about 1-00 p.m. on 8-11-1994, Inspector of Police, Sri Satya Sai Rural Circle, got information that Sri K. Siddaiah, Congress (I) candidate, along with his followers, while proceeding from Anantapur to Gorantla via Puttaparthi to file his nomination paper was got abducted at about 11-30 a.m. by Sri P. Ravindra Reddy, sitting M.L.A. who could not get Congress (1) Ticket, by his men who took him and his follower Sri G. Narasimhulu, Advocate, away to unknown destination. This information was passed on to superior officers and district S.B. Control on VHF set and a case was registered as Crime No. 93/1994 Under Sections 147, 148, 342, 323, 365 and 149, I.P.C. at Police Station, Gorantla, at 1-15 p.m. on 8-11-1994. All border Police Stations were alerted and search parties were deputed to different directions. During the course of investigation, it was ascertained that Commander Jeep No. AP 04 6336 was used in abducting the Congress (I) candidate and his follower. The Jeep was traced at 1-00 a.m. on 9-11-1994 near Gorantla Town and was seized. In the meantime information was received by the police in the early hours of 9-11-1994 that both the abducted persons had reached their houses at Anantapur at about mid-night. Sri K. Siddaiah and his friend and follower Sri G. Narasimhulu were examined by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Penukonda, and they stated that they were abducted on the instigation of Sri P. Ravindra Reddy, sitting M.L.A. by his men and were detained in the hillocks of Pamudurthi hilly area from 1-00 p.m. to 7-00 p.m., which prevented Sri K. Siddaiah from filing his nomination paper by 3-00 p.m. on 8-11-1994.

6. The above report of Superintendent of Police, Anantapur, was considered by the Election Commission of India on 10-11-1994 and being of the view that the purity of the election process was irretrievably sullied in 163, Gorantla Assembly Constituency in the State of Andhra Pradesh, and in those circumstances the result of the election in the said Constituency would not be reflective of the true choice of the electorate of that constituency, it recommended to the Governor of the State to rescind the notification dt. 1-11-1994 issued by him Under Section 15(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 in so far as it related to 163, Gorantla Assembly Constituency, so that the entire election process may be commenced anew in that Constituency. Acting upon the above recommendation, the Governor or Andhra Pradesh, by notification dated 11-11-1994, cancelled the notification dated 1-11-1994 issued Under Section 15(2) of the Act. The notification dt. 11-11-1994 was challenged by means of two writ petitions, namely, W.P. No. 20130/1994 (N. Kristappa v. the Chief Election Commissioner and Ors.) and W.P. No. 20283/1994 (P. Ravindra Reddy v. Election Commissioner and Ors.), filed in this Court on the ground, inter alia, that the Election Commission was not vested with any power to recommend recission of the notification issued Under Section 15(2) of the Act by which the election process was initiated in the State and that, the power, in any case, had been exercised in an unfair and arbitrary manner on the biased reports of the Chief Electoral Officer, Andhra Pradesh and, therefore, its recommendation to rescind the notification dated 1-11-1994 is vitiated. The writ petitions were dismissed by a common judgment and order dated 17-11-1994, and the present appeal is directed against this judgment.