https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180167 Contemporaneous documentary records and prior admissions were treated as substantive evidence of age, shifting the burden to the candidate to prove they were wrong. On that material, the Court found the returned candidate had not attained the constitutional minimum age on the scrutiny date, so his nomination was improperly accepted and his election was set aside. The Court then held that, in a proportional representation election by single transferable vote, disqualification of one candidate does not automatically justify declaring another candidate elected unless the rules clearly permit it. Because the voting consequences were speculative, the remaining appellant was not entitled to be declared elected. en-us Tue, 12 Apr 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Apr 2016 18:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180167 Contemporaneous documentary records and prior admissions were treated as substantive evidence of age, shifting the burden to the candidate to prove they were wrong. On that material, the Court found the returned candidate had not attained the constitutional minimum age on the scrutiny date, so his nomination was improperly accepted and his election was set aside. The Court then held that, in a proportional representation election by single transferable vote, disqualification of one candidate does not automatically justify declaring another candidate elected unless the rules clearly permit it. Because the voting consequences were speculative, the remaining appellant was not entitled to be declared elected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 12 Apr 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180167