ORDER : S.R. Brahmbhatt, J. Order in Civil Application No. 1 of 2019: Civil Application for amendment is allowed. The same shall be carried out. Order in Civil Application No. 2 of 2019: 1. The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 2731 of 2019 has made following prayers: "(A) This Hon'ble Court will be pleased to admit and allow the present petition. (B) This Hon'ble Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 01.02.2019 passed by the respondent No. 1 and produced at Annexure-A to this petition. (C) This Hon'ble Court will be pleased to order to suspend and/or stay the impugned order dated 01.02.2019 passed by the respondent No. 1 and produced at Annexure-A to this petition, in any and all manner, till and pending hearing and final disposal of this petition. (D) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents not to restrain the petitioner from holding the post of president and member of the Devbhumi Dwarka District Panchayat in any manner, pending hearing till final disposal of the present petition. (E) The ad-interim relief prayed in terms of para 8(C) and (D) may kindly be granted. (F) Be pleased to pass such other and further order(s) as the nature and circumstances of the present case may require:" Thus, what is essentially under challenge is the order passed by the Competent Authority dated 1.2.2019, whereby, the petitioner was declared to have incurred disqualification under Section 3 of Gujarat Provision for Disqualification of Members of Local Authorities for Defection Act, 1986. In this matter, all the present parties were represented by their respective counsels and on 12.2.2019, the following order was passed: "Notice returnable of 14.02.2019. Mr. J.K. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Mr. P.J. Kanabar, learned advocate, waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 3. Direct service qua respondent No. 2 is permitted." Thereafter, the pleadings were exchanged and it was waiting for its final hearing. 3. Mr. J.K. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Mr. P.J. Kanabar, learned advocate, waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 3. Direct service qua respondent No. 2 is permitted." Thereafter, the pleadings were exchanged and it was waiting for its final hearing. 3. The post of President of the District Panchayat of the concerned district, which was treated to have been fallen vacant on account of disqualification of the petitioner under order dated 1.2.2019 was notified for election for filling in post of President under order dated 17.6.2019. Thus, the election on the post was declared on the premise when the post had fallen vacant as the incumbent was declared to have incurred disqualification under order dated 1.2.2019, which is subject matter of challenge in the main matter being Special Civil Application No. 2731 of 2019 and in which, the Court has issued notice and parties have exchanged their pleadings. 4. The notification was sought to be challenged by way of Civil Application No. 1 of 2019 in Special Civil Application No. 2731 of 2019, in which, following prayers were made: "(A) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to admit and allow the present application. (B) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the papers of the Special Civil Application No. 2731 and further be pleased to permit the applicant to carry the amendment in the petition sought for in para 5 of the present application. (C) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief deemed fit in the interest of justice." As the subject matter, which was challenged to the election notification was not falling under the roster of learned Single Judge, the learned Single Judge passed the following order on 26.06.2019: "Office is directed to verify and place the Civil Applications before the appropriate Bench tomorrow." 5. Thereafter, the office has put up office submission dated 26.6.2019, which reads as under: "SUBMITTED TO THE HONOURABLE COURT:- This is regarding placement of the aforesaid matters before the appropriate Court. Thereafter, the office has put up office submission dated 26.6.2019, which reads as under: "SUBMITTED TO THE HONOURABLE COURT:- This is regarding placement of the aforesaid matters before the appropriate Court. In this connection, it is respectfully submitted that, the aforesaid matter was classified, as filed under the provision of Gujarat Disqualification of Members of Local Authorities for Defection Act, 1986 and 1987, and while hearing of SCA No. 2731/2019 with CA No. 1/2019 In SCA No. 2731/2019 with CA No. 2/2019 In SCA No. 2731/2019, the Honourable Court (Coram : Honourable Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi) has been pleased to pass following oral order on 26.06.2019: "office is directed to verify and place the Civil Applications before the appropriate Bench tomorrow" In this connection, it is further respectfully submitted that, the aforesaid SCA has been filed under the provision of Gujarat Disqualification of Members of Local Authorities for Defection Act, 1986 and 1987, wherein the Ld. Advocate has filed two applications i.e. Civil Application for Amendment and for Directions. Further, in Civil Application No. 2/2019 filed for directions wherein prayer (B) reads as under: (B) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the order dated 17/06/2019 passed by the Development Commissioner, State of Gujarat and the agenda for calling and convening the meeting of the District Panchayat, Devbhumi Dwarka, for electing the President on 28/06/2019, at annexure B colly to the present application." In this connection, it is further respectfully submitted that, pursuant to above order and on verification the aforesaid prayer (B), it is found that, SCAs relating to Election matters, pertaining to House of Parliament, State Legislative Assembly & Local Authorities(Excluding Market committee) have been assigned to the Hon'ble Court (Coram : Honourable Mr. Justice S.R. Brahmbhatt and Honourable Dr. Justice A.P. Thaker), as per present roster. In view of the above circumstances and as per the order dtd. 26/06/2019 passed by the Hon'ble Court, the aforesaid matter is placed before the Hon'ble Court." Through Assistant Registrar/Deputy Registrar: and accordingly, placed this matter before this Court. 6. A mention was made on 27.06.2019, for taking up the matter, as in view of the prayers prayed in the Civil Application No. 1 of 2019, the matter was falling under the Roster, which was assigned to this Court. 6. A mention was made on 27.06.2019, for taking up the matter, as in view of the prayers prayed in the Civil Application No. 1 of 2019, the matter was falling under the Roster, which was assigned to this Court. However, on account of paucity of time, matter could not be taken up on 27.06.2019 and it was listed today and matter was taken up today. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited this Court's attention to page Nos. 89 and 91 of the main matter to indicate that the mandate, if read completely, would render itself incapable of being proceeding on account of it being patently contradictory with the contents and hence it can be said that there was no clear mandate. The authorization letter contains two names, which were the names of candidates, who had not been set up by the parent party of the present petitioner and it is contended that page-89 is only an authorization letter and page-91 is the mandate, which had in fact never been issued, as the same is not forming part of the papers, which were made available on request by the concerned authority. The communications are placed on record at page Nos. 112, 113 and 114. The counsel have heavily relied upon those communications. The counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the observation of the competent authority in the impugned order and submitted that thus the real contention was qua flouting of the mandate but the present petitioner had been supported by opposite party's candidate in her getting election. It was viewed as abandoning of the party or voluntary giving up party, which had never been the plea of another contesting party. The authority rendered decision on 1.2.2019, which was subject matter of Special Civil Application No. 2731 of 2019 before this Court. 8. The counsel for the petitioner in support of his submission, relied upon the decision in case of Katara Bhaveshbhai Babubhai Vs. Designated Authority under the Gujarat Provision for Disqualification of Members & Ors.. reported in 2012 (5) GLR 4503 with special emphasis upon para-.5.3 for requirement of mandate and its clarity and unintelligible mandate, that would be the mandate that is sought to be canvassed. 9. Designated Authority under the Gujarat Provision for Disqualification of Members & Ors.. reported in 2012 (5) GLR 4503 with special emphasis upon para-.5.3 for requirement of mandate and its clarity and unintelligible mandate, that would be the mandate that is sought to be canvassed. 9. Learned AGP submitted that petition had been filed in the month of February, 2019 and the Court had merely issued notice only and therefore, when the notification for election was issued on 17.6.2019, the Court may not interfere therewith. 10. The learned AGP further submitted that the Supreme Court, has clearly said that if the conduct of the party is explained of, being construed as voluntary giving up membership, then there is no further inquiry required and petition could be viewed from that angle and therefore the stay, as sought for may not be granted. 11. Learned advocate Shri Kanabar appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 contended that the mandate and communication and attempt to show that there was no mandate by the authorized person, are of sharp practice required to be seen very clearly and though the notification and the order of election was of 17.6.2019, the amendment was sought to be made by way of application only on 24/25.6.2019 and therefore, in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in case Jagjitsingh Vs. State of Haryana And others, reported in (2006) 11 SCC 1 , special emphasis made on para Nos. 28, 29 and 53, therefore, it can well be said that the very conduct itself indicates that the petitioner had incurred disqualification on the date she was elected with the help of opposition party member. 12. We are of the view that the petition is at large before the Court. The Court has found it fit to examine the order dated 1.2.2019, impugned in this petition. The order of notice was issued after hearing all the concerned parties meaning thereby, the counsels for the concerned parties could not convince the Court for dismissing the matter in limine and the Court is in fact examining the matter. 13. The Rule 11 of the Gujarat Taluka And District Panchayats President And Vice-President Election Rules, 1994, reads as under: "11. 13. The Rule 11 of the Gujarat Taluka And District Panchayats President And Vice-President Election Rules, 1994, reads as under: "11. Power to call meeting at postponed date - If at the first meeting the election does not take place for any reason whatsoever, the Presiding Officer may adjourn the meeting to any other day" 14. In this view of the matter, when there is a power vested in the concerned officer to postpone the election in a given situation and when there is no clear statutory mandate to conduct the election in a given time and when this Court is in seisin of the matter and examining rival contentions of the parties and the order of disqualification is under challenge i.e. order dated 1.2.2019, this Court is of the considered view that the holding of the election of post would render the petition infructuous without there being any adjudication. Such a situation has been said to be unfortunate and requires to be arrested immediately, as could be seen from the observation of the Supreme Court in case of Election Commission of India Vs. Bajrang Bahadur Singh & Ors. reported in (2015) 12 SCC 570 . (para-62 & 63). In this view of the matter, when there is prima facie case made out so far as the examination of the order impugned is concerned, we are of the view that permitting the election to proceed, would render the entire petition infructuous and that can never be the permissible situation. The balance of convenience also would weigh in favour of the petitioner and therefore we are of the view that the notification dated 17.6.2019 is required to be stayed. 15. In the result, the Civil Application No. 2 of 2019 is disposed of accordingly. Order in Special Civil Application No. 2731 of 2019: The matter be listed for hearing on 04.07.2019. The parties are to exchange the pleadings, if any, by then. Direct service permitted today.