1997 INSC 1079
                                        Dharti Pakar Madan Lal Agarwal

                                                           Vs

                                                  K. R. Narayanan

                          (S. C. Agrawal, G. N. Ray, A. S. Anand, S. P. Bharucha,

                                                S. Rajendra Babu JJ)

                                                      24.11.1997

                                                     JUDGMENT

S.C.AGRAWAL, J.:

1.This petition has been filed by the petitioner in person. It has been described as Election Petition-
cum-Writ Petition. During the course of his submissions before the Court it was pointed out to the
petitioner that such a composite petition is not maintainable and that the petitioner could choose to
have the petition treated as an election petition or a writ petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution. The petitioner submitted that the petition be treated as a writ petition and that the
reliefs sought by him regarding setting aside of the election of respondent No.1 may be deleted. As
per the said statement of the petitioner this petition has been treated as a writ petition filed under
Article 32 of the Constitution and reliefs: (a), (d) and (h) have been deleted. The petition is thus
confined to the challenge to the validity to the provisions of Sections 5B and 5C of the Presidential
and Vice-Presidential Elections Act, 1952 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] as amended by
presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections [Amendment] Ordiance, 1997 [No.13 of 1997],
hereinafter referred to as 'the Ordiance' Insofar as the challenge to the validity of Sections 5B and
5C, and amended by Act 5 of 1974 and as they stood prior to the promulgation of Ordiance of 1997,
has been upheld by a 7-judge bench of this Court in Charan Lal Sahu Vs.Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy,
1978 (1) SCR 1.The validity of Ordiance was challenged before this Court in W.P.(C) Nos.293/97
and 322/97 which have been dismissed by orders dated June 19, 1997 and July 11, 1997
respectively.The Ordiance has been replaced by the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections
[Amendment] Act, 1997 [Act 35 of 1997].The validity of the said Act was challenged in W.P.(C)
No.D 13334/97 and the said writ petition was dismissed by order dated October 13, 1997.

2.The petitioner has submitted that the decision of this Court Charan Lal Sahu Vs.Neelam Sanjeeva
Reddy [supra] needs reconsideration. We do not find any substance in the said submission of the
petitioner. There is thus no merit in this petition and it is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner has
also filed an application seeking exemption from payment of court fee. We have persued the said
application. The said application is allowed.