Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1992 DIGILAW 992 (SC)

Sharadchandra Govind Rao Pawar v. E. V. Alias Balasahed Vikhe Patil

1992-11-27

L.M.SHARMA, S.MOHAN, S.P.BHARUCHA

body1992
JUDGMENT : 1. The point arising in this cause is also involved in the other cases. We accordingly directed that all the cases he placed together on the cause list today. 2. It appears that in some of the other cases some additional points also arise. We do not propose to deal with them at this stage. We will proceed to consider the disputed question of this case alone and the parties in the other cases interested in that question shall also he heard, although their cases may not be finally disposed of immediately. 3. Mr. Venugopal, learned counsel for the contesting respondent has suggested that the case may he heard expeditiously so that the hearing of the main election petition pending in the High Court may not be delayed. He has in the alternative urged that no interim order may he passed in respect of the impugned order. Mr. Ashok Desai, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that thousands of pages of material has been served on the petitioner with respect to which he has to clarify his position and this is not possible unless the case is adjourned for a considerably long period. The common estimate of the learned counsel for the parties about the time which this case before us is likely to take for final disposal is about 4 days. 4. In view of the constitution of the present Board, it is not practical to hear the matter finally before the Court closes for the Christmas holidays. In the circumstances, we are adjourning the case to the 8th January, 1993. The parties shall he ready for final disposal of this case. We also agree with Mr. Ashok Desai that the petitioner may require time to prepare his reply for being filed in the High Court in pursuance of the impugned order. We are, therefore, staying the impugned order. We, however, make it clear that the petitioner shall proceed to examine the materials served on him without delay so that in case the special leave petitions are ultimately decided against him, he may be able to file his show cause promptly thereafter. Thus, this adjournment will not cause avoidable delay in the disposal of the election petition pending in the High Court. Let all the cases be placed on the Board as the last item under the miscellaneous head on 8th January, 1993.