Mandatory electoral disclosure permits rejection of nomination papers filed with blank affidavits despite the earlier limitation on concealed information.

A nomination paper accompanied by an affidavit with blank particulars does not satisfy the mandatory electoral disclosure requirement, because the voter's right to know a candidate's antecedents, assets, liabilities and educational qualifications is treated as part of Article 19(1)(a). The Returning Officer may insist on complete disclosure, remind the candidate to fill the blanks, and reject the nomination if the affidavit remains incomplete. The earlier view that nominations should not be summarily rejected for false or concealed information does not prevent rejection where the affidavit itself is filed with blank particulars.

---

---

Issues: Whether a nomination paper accompanied by an affidavit with blank particulars can be rejected by the Returning Officer, and whether the earlier ruling on disclosure in election affidavits prevents such rejection.

Analysis: The right of voters to know the antecedents, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications of candidates was treated as an integral part of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The affidavit required along with the nomination paper serves to give effect to that right, and leaving columns blank defeats the object of disclosure. The relevant provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, particularly the disclosure requirement, scrutiny power, and penal provision, were read together to hold that the Returning Officer may insist on complete particulars and may reject the nomination if the candidate does not fill the blanks even after being reminded. The earlier view against summary rejection for false or concealed information was held not to bar rejection where the affidavit itself is filed with blank particulars.

Conclusion: An affidavit filed with blank particulars does not satisfy the statutory disclosure requirement, and the nomination paper may be rejected on that ground; the petitioner's contention was accepted.

Final Conclusion: The decision strengthened mandatory electoral disclosure, affirmed the voter's right to full candidate information, and clarified that blank affidavits are not protected by the earlier limitation on rejecting nominations for false or concealed particulars.

Ratio Decidendi: The disclosure affidavit accompanying a nomination must contain complete particulars to effectuate the voter's constitutional right to know, and a nomination supported by a blank affidavit may be rejected because it frustrates that right.

---