Anulling the election of the MLA Bikram Kesri Arukh, a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice A S Anand, Justice S Rajendra Babu and Justice R C Lahoti said, improper rejection of the nomination papers by itself is sufficient ground for invalidation of elections.

The returning officer had rejected the nomination papers of one Panchanan Das on the ground that he was a public distribution system (PDS) dealer for a Bhanjanagar constituency ward at the time of filing nominations, which amounted to disqualification under Section 9a of the Representation of the People Act.

The Orissa High Court had held that though nomination papers were rejected improperly, "the candidate himself states that his presence in the field of contest would have hardly made any difference andwould not have materially affected the elections of the elected candidate".

The Apex Court held that the nomination papers were improperly rejected as holding of PDS dealership did not amount to having any subsisting contract in the course of his trade or business with the appropriate government for execution of any work undertaken by that Government as envisaged under Section 9a.

The Supreme Court said, "Such a person does not suffer any disqualification for being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly under Section 9a."

Referring to the arguments on behalf of Arukh, the Apex Court bench said, "We find ourselves unable to accept the submission made by counsel for Arukh that in Section 9a of the Act, the expression `works' would also include `schemes' of the type of PDS."