2007 (12) TMI 459 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether the office of Chairperson or Members of the Walf Board is an office of profit so as to disqualify a person from being elected as a member of the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi?

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 31A of the Wakf Act, 1995 regarding disqualification for membership of the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi.
2. Examination of the retrospective application of Section 31A to elections held before 2006.
3. Consideration of legal fictions in interpreting statutes.
4. Analysis of the High Court's judgment on points raised in the election petition beyond the issue of office of profit.

Interpretation of Section 31A:
The case involved a challenge to the disqualification of a candidate for holding an office of profit while contesting an election to the Delhi Legislative Assembly. The central issue revolved around the interpretation of Section 31A of the Wakf Act, 1995, as amended by The Wakf (Delhi Amendment) Act, 2006. The provision stated that the Chairperson or Members of the Board for the Union Territory of Delhi shall not be disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly. The appellant argued that since the election took place in 2003 and the amendment came into force in 2006, it should not apply retrospectively. However, the Court held that the provision, by stating "shall be deemed never to have been disqualified," created a legal fiction indicating retrospective application.

Retrospective Application of Section 31A:
The Court emphasized that while the Amendment Act did not expressly mention retrospective effect, the language used implied such an intention. Citing legal precedents, the Court explained that legal fictions are recognized in law and must be given effect as if the imagined state of affairs were real. Therefore, even if the candidate was disqualified in 2003, the insertion of Section 31A in 2006 deemed him not to have been disqualified, leading to his eligibility for the election.

Legal Fictions in Statutory Interpretation:
The judgment delved into the concept of legal fictions, quoting Lord Asquith and highlighting their acceptance in legal principles. The Court noted that legal fictions, like the one in Section 31A, require imagining a certain state of affairs as real, including its consequences and incidents. By applying this principle, the Court affirmed the retrospective application of the provision to resolve the disqualification issue.

High Court's Judgment on Election Petition Points:
The appellant raised concerns about the High Court's failure to address various points in the election petition beyond the office of profit issue. However, the Court clarified that a Judge is presumed to consider all points pressed during arguments unless explicitly given up. It explained that if a point is not mentioned in the judgment, it is presumed to have been abandoned. The appellant was advised to approach the same Court for review if points were overlooked. As the High Court's judgment focused solely on the office of profit matter, the Court declined to entertain other points raised in the petition, leading to the dismissal of the appeals without costs.