JUDGMENT 1. - We do not find any ground to condone the delay of 57 days in filing the appeal. Even otherwise the appeal is devoid of any merit. 2. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in SBCW Petition No. 848/2002 dated 10th December, 2002 whereby the order of the Divisional Commissioner dated 19th January, 2002 (Anx. 10) suspending the respondent from the elected post of Ward Panch of Gram Panchayat Harsaur and subsequent order of the Divisional Commissioner dated 22nd May, 2002 (Anx. R/3) declaring him ineligible for the post of Ward Panch was quashed. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows:- On 4th February, 2000, Asgar All was elected as Ward Panch, Gram Panchayat, Harsaur Panchayat Samiti, Degana, District Nagaur. After his election a complaint was filed against Asgar All sometimes in January, 2001 to the effect that his wife gave birth to two children after cut-off date, viz. 27th November, 1995 and as a consequence thereof, disqualification under Section 19(1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act (for short "the Act") was incurred by him. Pursuant to the complaint an enquiry was held by the Divisional Commissioner under Section 39 of the Act read with Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules framed thereunder. The Divisional Commissioner, by his order dated 22nd May, 2002 came to the conclusion that the children were born to the wife of the respondent Asgar Ali after the cut-off date and as such, he had incurred disqualification under Section 19 of the Act. Consequently, the Divisional Commissioner by his order dated 22nd May 2002 (Anx. R/3) declared the respondent ineligible to hold the office of Ward Panch. Dissatisfied with the orders passed by the Divisional Commissioner, the respondent Asgar All filed a writ petition. The learned single Judge, by the impugned order dated 10th December, 2002 allowed the writ petition and quashed the orders of the Divisional Commissioner dated 19th January, 2002 and 22nd May, 2002. The learned single Judge, summoned the relevant Marriage Register on the basis of which the Divisional Commissioner came to a finding that Asgar Ali fathered two children after the cut-off date. The learned single Judge, summoned the relevant Marriage Register on the basis of which the Divisional Commissioner came to a finding that Asgar Ali fathered two children after the cut-off date. Learned single Judge was of the opinion that from the Register it did appear that some survey was conducted by the Primary Health Centre, Nagaur but it was not clear as to who had made the entries in the Register with regard to the birth of aforesaid two children and it was also not clear as to who was the person who gave the information which was recorded in the Register. The learned single Judge was of the view that the respondent was declared disqualified on the basis of unreliable and incomplete record. Consequently, the orders of the Divisional Commissioner were quashed. 3. We do not find any error in the order passed by the learned single Judge. It is not disputed that the Marriage Register kept at Health Centre, Nagaur does not give any clue to the identity of the person on whose information the entries relating to the number of children born to the respondent Asgar Ali and his (sic) were made. It is also not disputed that the Register does not reveal the identity of the person who made the survey and the date when the information was collected. 4. In the circumstances, therefore, the learned single Judge was entirely right in holding that there was no worthwhile evidence for the view that two children were born to the wife of Asgar All after the cut-off date. 5. In the circumstances, therefore, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******