Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 3008 (PNJ)

Ninder Kaur v. Tarlok Singh

2010-11-10

L.N.MITTAL

body2010
Judgment L.N.Mittal, J. 1. For reasons mentioned in the application, which is accompanied by affidavit, delay of six days in filing the appeal is condoned. FAO No. 2951 of 2010 2. Election petitioner Ninder Kaur having remained unsuccessful before the Election Tribunal (Deputy Commissioner), Tarn Taran has filed the instant appeal. 3. Election of Panches of Gram Panchayat, Thathian Mohantan District Tarn Taran was held on 26.5.2008. The petitioner was elected as Panch under Scheduled Caste (S.C.) women category. Respondents no. 1 to 16 were also elected as Panches of the said Gram Panchayat in the said election under different categories. The appellant alleged in her election petition that office of Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat was reserved for SC women category when election schedule was announced on 26,4.2008 but later on office of Sarpanch was reserved for general category vide notification dated 12.5.2008. The appellants grievance is that the reservation of office of Sarpanch could not be changed from SC women category to general category after commencement of the election process. Accordingly, the appellant prayed in the election petition that office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Thathian Mohantan be reserved for SC women category or in the alternative election of Panches as per result dated 26.5.2008 be set aside. 4. Respondents contested the election petition and controverted the allegations of the appellant-election petitioner and raised various pleas. 5. Learned Election Tribunal, Tarn Taran vide impugned order dated 24.8.2009 has dismissed the election petition. Feeling aggrieved, the election petitioner has filed the instant appeal. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that vide notification Annexure A/1, office of Sarpanch of this Gram Panchayat was reserved for SC women category but it was changed to general category vide notification dated 12.5.2008, Annexure A/2 although the category could not be changed after commencement of the election process. 8. I have carefully considered the aforesaid contention but the same is completely misconceived and untenable. As noticed hereinabove, the appellant claimed twin reliefs in the alternative in the election petition but even taking averments of the appellant at face value, neither of the said reliefs could be granted to the appellant in the election petition by the Election Tribunal. 8. I have carefully considered the aforesaid contention but the same is completely misconceived and untenable. As noticed hereinabove, the appellant claimed twin reliefs in the alternative in the election petition but even taking averments of the appellant at face value, neither of the said reliefs could be granted to the appellant in the election petition by the Election Tribunal. Learned counsel for the appellant is unable to refer to any provision of any statute or rules to depict that Election Tribunal has authority to order reservation of office of Sarpanch for any category. Election petition cannot be filed to claim any such relief. 9. As regards setting aside the election result dated 26.5.2008 regarding election of appellant and respondent nos. 1 to 16 as Panches of the Gram Panchayat, no infirmity much less irregularity or illegality in the said election has been alleged in the election petition. Even if it be assumed for the sake of argument that category of office of Sarpanch was illegally changed as alleged by the appellant, even then election of Panches of the Gram Panchayat is not vitiated in any manner on that ground. Election of Panches cannot be set aside on the ground that category of office of Sarpanch was illegally changed. For setting aside election of Panches, requisite grounds provided in the statute have to be pleaded and proved. The ground of illegal change of category of office of Sarpanch is not a ground provided in any provision of law for setting aside election of Panches. Learned counsel for the appellant is unable to refer to any provision of law for setting aside the election of Panches on the said ground. Thus, even taking averments of the appellant in the election petition at face value, neither of the two reliefs claimed in the alternative by the appellant in the election petition could be granted by the Election Tribunal. 10. The appellant has also failed to establish that category of office of Sarpanch was illegally changed. The appellant has not placed on record complete notification Annexure A/1. In fact the document placed on record does not even depict as to under what provisions of law and for what purposes the said notification was issued and when the same was issued. The appellant has also failed to establish that category of office of Sarpanch was illegally changed. The appellant has not placed on record complete notification Annexure A/1. In fact the document placed on record does not even depict as to under what provisions of law and for what purposes the said notification was issued and when the same was issued. Consequently, it cannot be said that office of Sarpanch of this Gram Panchayat was reserved for SC women category when the election process commenced. On the other hand, notification Annexure A/2 has been issued by the Deputy Commissioner in exercise of power under section 12 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 read with rules 3 and 6 of the Punjab Reservation for the Office of Sarpanches of Gram Panchayats Rules, 1994 whereby office of Sarpanch of this Gram Panchayat has been reserved for the general category. In addition to it, perusal of part of notification Annexure A/1 as placed on record reveals that there was only proposal to reserve office of Sarpanch of this Gram Panchayat for SC women category and the said office was not actually reserved for the said category by notification Annexure A/i which was only a proposal but finally vide notification Annexure A/2 the office of Sarpanch of this Gram Panchayat was reserved for general category. Consequently, there has been no illegality in reserving the office of Sarpanch of this Gram Panchayat for general category. 11. For the reasons aforesaid, I find no infirmity much less illegality in the impugned order of the Election Tribunal so as to warrant interference in appeal. The instant appeal is completely devoid of any substance and is, therefore, dismissed in limine.