IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
(CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. OF 2017
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ajay Trivedi …Petitioner
Versus
1. State of NCT ( New Delhi)
2. Election Commission
3. Secretary of Delhi Government
4. MLA Arun Kumar of South Delhi …. Respondent
Advocate for Petitioner: Nisha Nandini
INDEX
SI. Particulars of Document Page No.
NO.
1 Synopsis
2 List of dates
3 Writ Petition
4 Affidavit
5 Appendix
6 Annexure P-1 The true copy of
the birth certificate of Arun
Kumar (MLA)
7 ANNEXURE P-2
True copy of the receipt of the
ticket to stand for MLA Election
8 ANNEXURE P-3
True copy of the Result of MLA
Election
9 ANNEXURE P-4
True copy of the appointment
letter of the MLA
10 ANNEXURE P-5
A true copy of the RTI filed
11 ANNEXURE P-6
A True copy of dual citizenship
certificate
12 ANNEXTURE P-7
A true copy of FIR of murder
case of 2012 in the name of Mr.
Arun Kumar
PETITIONER IN PERSON
DATED:
NEW DELHI
THROUGH
NISHA NANDINI
(ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER)
SYNOPSIS
1. The present petition is the Quo-Warranto petition filed by the former MLA of
South Delhi Mr. Ajay Trivedi seeking to know on what basis Mr. Arun Kumar
is appointed as the MLA as he did not comply with the criteria for selection of
MLA’S, So the petition is filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India.
2. That the petition is filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi to the
Respondents, who dealt with the Election of the present MLA Election held
for South Delhi.
3. That the MR. Arun Kumar aged 24 years and 27 days, resident of Krishnapuri,
South Delhi.
4. That Mr. Arun Kumar has been elected as a MLA, and also had taken the oath.
5. The petitioner has also submitted that Mr. Arun Kumar holds the Dual
Citizenship Certificate. And according to the Art. 173 of Indian Constitution a
person who holds the dual citizenship cannot be allowed for the Election for
member of legislative assembly.
6. That the petition is filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi to the
Respondents, who dealt with the Election of the present MLA Election held
for South Delhi.
7. That the writ petition seeks to call upon all the 4 Respondents – State of NCT
(New Delhi), Election Commissioner, Secretary of Delhi Government and
MLA Mr. Arun Kumar of South Delhi.
8. That Mr. Arun Kumar was also involved in 3 murder cases for which Mr.
Arun Kumar is imprisoned for nearly 3 year in 2012. And somehow this news
is hidden from the filing for nomination to contest in elections.
9. That the eligibility criteria for becoming MLA are of minimum age of 25 years
but the appointed MLA, Mr Arun Kumar is of 23 years and 156 days old.
10. That the Right to Information is filed to Government to Delhi to take action
against Mr. Arun Kumar who is elected as MLA of South Delhi.
11. That the Secretary of Delhi Government replied to the petitioner that the
Government is not answerable to his questions.
12. This writ petition basically challenges the appointment of respondent no. 4
seeking the writ of Quo Warranto on the ground that his appointment is in
teeth of the provisions contained in 173 of the Indian constitution and also
ultra-vires the guidelines for the appointment of MLA.
LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
Date Event
2.02.1993 Arun Kumar was born.
17.11.2016 Arun Kumar gets the ticket to stand for
MLA Election.
13.02.2017 Election for MLA is completed and the
age of Arun Kumar is 24 at present
time.
25.02.2017 Result of MLA Election is declared.
9.03.2017 Arun Kumar is elected as MLA of
South Delhi.
21.03.2017 Arun Kumar has taken the oath as a
MLA of South Delhi.
3.04.2017 A case of Right to Information is filed
against Secretary of Delhi Government.
4.05.2017 Petitioner gets the revert from secretary
of Delhi Government.
7.05.2017 The petition is filed.
Hence this writ petition for quo warranto
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
(CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. OF 2017
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ajay Trivedi …Petitioner
Versus
1. State of NCT ( New Delhi)
2. Election Commission
3. Secretary of Delhi Government
4. MLA Arun Kumar of South Delhi …. Respondents
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION FOR
ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO,
To:
The Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India and the Hon’ble Companion
Judges of the Supreme Court of India
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF
THE PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED
MOST REPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. The present petition is the Quo-Warranto petition filed by the former MLA
of South Delhi Mr. Ajay Trivedi seeking to know on what basis Mr. Arun
Kumar is appointed as the MLA as he did not comply with the criteria for
selection of MLA’S, So the petition is filed under Art.226 of the
Constitution of India.
2. On dated 07.05.2017 the petition is filed in the Hon’ble High Court of
Delhi to the Respondents, who dealt with the Election of the present MLA
Election held for South Delhi.
3. That the MR. Arun Kumar s/o Lal Kumar, R/o Krishnapuri, South Delhi
was born on 02.02.1993Annexure.1.
4. On dated 21.03.2017 That Mr. Arun Kumar has been elected as a MLA,
and also had taken the oath.
5. The petitioner has also submitted that Mr. Arun Kumar holds the Dual
Citizenship Certificate Annexure 6 and according to the Art. 173 of Indian
Constitution a person who holds the dual citizenship is not eligible for the
Election for member of legislative assembly.
6. That the writ petition seeks to call upon all the 4 Respondents – State of
NCT (New Delhi) Election Commissioner, Secretary of Delhi Government
and MLA Mr. Arun Kumar of South Delhi.
7. That Mr. Arun Kumar was also involved in 3 murder cases for which Mr.
Arun Kumar is imprisoned for nearly 3 year in 2012 Annexure 7. And
somehow this news is hidden from the filing for nomination to contest in
elections.
8. That the eligibility criteria for becoming MLA are of minimum age of 25
years but the appointed MLA; Mr Arun Kumar is of 23 years and 156 days
old Annexure 1.
9. That on dated 03.04.2017, the Right to Information is filed to Government
to Delhi to take action against Mr. Arun Kumar who is elected as MLA of
South Delhi Annexure 5.
10. That on dated 04.05.2017, the Secretary of Delhi Government replied to
the petitioner that the Government is not answerable to his questions.
11. That this writ petition basically challenges the appointment of respondent
no. 4 seeking the writ of Quo Warranto on the ground that his appointment
is in teeth of the provisions contained in 173 of the Indian constitution and
also ultra-vires the guidelines for the appointment of MLA.
GROUNDS
A. Because the respondent no. 4 was not qualifying the eligibility criteria for
the appointment of MLA as Mr. Arun Kumar is holding dual citizenship
which is a disqualification for the appointment of becoming member of
legislative assembly under article 173 of the constitution of India and
hence it is a serious violation of the constitution of India.
B. Because the violation of constitution is incurred as the appointed MLA Mr.
Arun Kumar under Article 84(b) and 173(b) of the constitution of India
read with section 36(2) of R.P act, 1951.
C. Because the respondent no. 4 was convicted for imprisonment for the term
of 3 years and as per section 8(3) of R.P act 1951 if a person is convicted
of any offence and sentenced to an imprisonment of 2 years and more, this
will be disqualification to contest election.
D. Because the respondent had intentionally submitted the affidavit which
was not true as he had not mention his criminal records under section 33A
of R.P act 2002(amended) by way of furnishing information relating to his
criminal records if any. In Kisan Shankar Kathori vs Arun Dattatry
Sawant and ors. (2012) 14 SCC 162, it was held that violation of section
33A can lead to reject the nomination for election.
E. Because article 192(1) of the constitution of India provides the rights to
every citizen to raise the question against the election of member of
legislative that on what ground he has been elected. In Brundaban nayak
vs election commission of India and another.
F. That the petitioner has not filed any other similar petition before this
Hon’ble court or before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India or any other
Hon’ble court seeking similar relief.
PRAYER
In light of the facts and circumstances of this case, the Petitioners pray
before this Hon’ble Court as under:
a. For a writ of Quo Warranto directing the Election
commission of India for disqualifying the election and
appointment of MLA Mr. Arun Kumar on the Grounds of
not complying with the qualification for the appointment
of member of legislative assembly.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY BOUND
SHALL EVER BE GRATEFUL
Drawn on:
Drawn By: Advocate Nisha Nandini
Filed on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
(CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. OF 2017
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ajay Trivedi …Petitioner
Versus
1. State of NCT ( New Delhi)
2. Election Commission
3. Secretary of Delhi Government
4. MLA Arun Kumar of South Delhi …. Respondent
AFFIDAVIT
I Ajay Trivadi, S/o Krishan Lal, aged about 69 years, resident of House
No. 75,Police Colony, Shalimar Bagh Delhi- 110088, do hereby solemnly
affirm and swear as under:
1. That I am the Petitioner in the above-mentioned case and well
conversant with the facts and circumstance of the case and hence
competent to swear this Affidavit.
2. That the accompanying petition under article 226 of the constitution
of India has been drafted by my council under my instructions and I
affirm an oath that the facts contained in the said petition have
been read over before me in my vernacular language anf
understood by me and I further affirm that the same are true and
correct to my knowledge.
3. All the annexure of the Petition are the true copy of its original.
4. That the petitioner has not filed any other similar petition before
this Hon’ble Court or before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India or any
other Hon’ble Court seeking similar relief.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi on this _______the day of _______of 2017,that
the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my
knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been
conceived there from.
DEPONENT
