Representation of the People's Act 1976 Under section 9 and 52 election petition, the retiring candidate as chairman of the district council in his constituency as the chairman of the district council, on the expenditure on the schemes by the retired candidate, as the presiding officer and the polling officer, in the district area, held He was obliged to remove and redress the grievances of the people to whom he was chairman, by approving various development schemes and incurring expenses, especially when it was proved that such costs were incurred on the running schemes. No more funds. The district council staff was released after the government banned such expenditure, not by a retired candidate as chairman of the district council, but by the local government. Could not be understood as an employee. There was no evidence presented in the employment of the chairman that the local government employees who served under the district council were honored at the direction of the deposed candidate, or that such staff did nothing during the election. In favor of
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
