( 1 ) THE petitioner has presented this writ petition aggrieved by the rejection of her nomination paper filed in connection with the election of members to the soolanayakanahalli Village Panchayat, Pavagada Taluk, Tumkur District. ( 2 ) THE nomination paper of the petitioner was rejected by the Election officer on the ground that the left thumb mark of the petitioner, who was a candidate, on the nomination paper was not attested by any one. In view of the urgency of the matter, I directed the Government Advocate to take notice. Accordingly Sri G. R. Nataraj, learned High Court Government Pleader appeared for respondents 1 and 2. By consent of parties, the petition is taken up for hearing. Original records were also produced at the time of hearing. ( 3 ) AT the relevant place in the nomination paper where the signature of the candidate is required to be affixed, there is a left thumb mark. It is also written by by the side of the left thumb mark as "sannakka". There is no attestation to the effect that the left thumb mark placed therein is that of the candidate either by the proposer or by any other person. The Election Officer has taken the view that in the absence of attestation to the effect that the left thumb mark on the nomination paper is that of the candidate, the same constitutes substantial defect in the completion of the nomination paper and therefore has rejected the nomination paper in exercise of the powers under sub-rule (3) of Rule 12 of the Karnataka Panchayats and Taluk Boards Election Rules, 1959. ( 4 ) SRI K. N. Chandrasekhara, learned counsel for the the petitioner argued that the defect is not of a substantial character and therefore the Election Officer violated the provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 12 of the Rules aforesaid in rejecting the nomination paper. Sri G. R. Nataraj, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 however submitted that unless the left thumb mark was attested to the effect that it is the left thumb mark of the candidate, it constitutes a serious defect and the Election Officer had no other alternative but to reject the nomination paper. ( 5 ) I am unable to agree with the contention for the petitioner that non-attestation of the left thumb mark is not a defect of substantial character. ( 5 ) I am unable to agree with the contention for the petitioner that non-attestation of the left thumb mark is not a defect of substantial character. The signature or the left thumb mark of a candidate is of utmost importance in a nomination paper. If the left thumb mark is not attested properly, the Election Officer cannot presume that the left thumb mark on the nomination paper is that of the candidate. Therefore, the non-attestation of the left thumb mark constitutes a serious defect and therefore it cannot be said the Election Officer violated the provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 12 of the Rules in rejecting the nomination paper. ( 6 ) FOR the reasons stated above, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sri G. R. Nataraj, learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks. --- *** --- .