A division judge bench of the Justice Vipin Sanghi and R.C. Khulbe of Uttarakhand HC has dimissed the writ petition in the matter of panchayati raj elections being barred by law. However, after perusing the Section 131H (10) of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016 they expressed their dismay on the poor drafting of the section as it leads the gate open to various ambiguities.
Facts:
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition primarily to seek a writ of quo warranto declaring that respondent no.4 was disqualified to hold the Office of Adhyaksh, Zila Panchayat, Rudraprayag. The petitioner also challenges the order dated 25.10.2022 passed by respondent no.3 i.e. District Magistrate, Rudraprayag, whereby the application moved by the petitioner for rejection of the candidature of respondent no.4 was turned down.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed that the present petition is barred by law by relying on Article 243-O and perusal of the Section 131H (10) of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016. Therefore, they concluded that it is clear that it is open to the petitioner to raise the question with regard to the alleged disqualification of respondent no.4 before the District Judge concerned. This petition is, therefore, not maintainable and was, accordingly, dismissed. However, before psrting with the matter, this court expressed their complete dismay at the utter lack of competence in the State’s administration as the perusal of the said sub-section shows the extremely poor drafting of the legislation. The language used is grammatically incorrect and open to ambiguity. It is high-time, the State roped in competent officers in the larger public interest, if necessary, by inviting experienced officers with proven competence on deputation. Therefore, they directed that this order be placed before the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttarakhand.
Decision:
The writ petition is dismissed as being barred by the law. However, the dismay was expressed by the court on the poor drafting of Section 131H (10) of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016 and directed to place this order before the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttarakhand and hoped that State will take appropriate action on an urgent basis.
Case: Jyoti Devi vs State of Uttarakhand through Collector
Citation: WPMS No.2693 of 2022
Coram: Justice Vipin Sanghi and R.C. Khulbe
Dated: 03.11.2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
