The provisions of clause (b) of Article 63(1) attracts clause-(n) to the proviso of Article-12(1) of the RPO. Therefore, the High Court Division came to a correct finding that the appellant defaulted in paying telephone bill and that accordingly, the he was disqualified from being elected as per clause (n) of proviso to Article 12(1) of the RPO. It is important to note here that if the allegation brought by respondent No.1 was within the ambit of the provisions of clause- (c) to sub-article (1) of Article-63 then the High Court Division would be required to give a finding that because of corrupt or illegal practices committed by the returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the connivance of the candidate or his election agent, the result of the election has been materially affected. But in the case in hand such a finding in not necessary because sub-clause(b) is independent of clause(c)of Article 63(1) of the RPO. We do not find any substance to interfere with the impugned judgment because the ultimate decision of the High Court Division is correct. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed without any order as to costs. .....Abul Kashem(Md.) =VS= Mahmudul Hasan, (Civil), 2018 (1) [4 LM (AD) 15] ....View Full Judgment