Madhya Pradesh High Court
Madhav Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 July, 2022
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
ON THE 13th OF JULY, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 16045 of 2022
Between:-
MADHAV KOL S/O SHRI GUDDI KOL , AGED
ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR/
CONTESTING CANDIDATE ON THE POST OF
SARPANCH IN GRAM PANCHAYAT KATHOTIYA
VILLAGE KATHOTIYA, TEHSIL SOHAGPUR,
DISTRICT- SHAHDOL, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI Y.K.CHOURASIYA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF
PANCHAYAT RAJ MANTRALAYA, VALLAB
BHAWAN BHOPAL (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER/
COLLECTOR SHAHDOL DISTRICT-SHAHDOL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER /RETURNING
O FFI C ER JANPAD PANCHAYAT SOHAGPUR
DISTRICT SHAHDOL M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. VIPHAYA KOL S/O SHRI RAMCHANDI , AGED
ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ELECTED
SARPANCH GRAM PANCHAYAT KATHOTIYA,
TEHSIL SOHAGPUR DISTRICT SHAHDOL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 BY SHRI SIDDHARTH SETH -
ADVOCATE)
Signature Not Verified
SAN
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF
Date: 2022.07.13 18:11:47 IST
following:
ORDER
In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent no.2 to decide the
objection/representation dated 2.7.2022 and further to conduct re-election in
Gram Panchayat Kathotiya, Janpad Panchayat Sohagpur, District Shahdol
(M.P.).
The grievance of the petitioner is that the Returning Officer after issuing
the candidates list and election symbol have changed the election symbol and
serial number of the candidate list due to which petitioner lost the election of
Sarpanch. In these circumstances, direction may be issued to respondents to
decide the representation in accordance with aforesaid provision at the earliest.
P er contra, Shri Seth opposed the aforesaid contention and submitted
that various disputed questions of fact are involved in the present case which
can only be done in the election petition. He further submitted that the present
writ petition is not maintainable in view of the fact that the election has already
b een notified on 27.05.2022 and thereafter results are to be declared on
14.7.2022. In support of his contention he has placed reliance on the judgment
o f the Apex court in the case of Laxmibai Vs. Collector, Nanded and
others, reported in (2020)12 SCC 186 and S.K.Mahaboob Bee (Smt.) and
others Vs. State Election Commissioner and others, reported in (2000)10
SCC 512 to contend that the writ petition is not maintainable after the elections
have been notified. However, he fairly stated that the petitioner has alternative
remedy of filing election petition under Section 122 of the Madhya Pradesh
Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter shall be
Signature Not Verified
referred to as "the Adhiniyam") after the election is over.
SAN
Constitutional amendment has been brought in the Constitution
Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF
Date: 2022.07.13 18:11:47 IST
incorporating Section 243-O of the Constitution of India, relevant provisions
whereof reads as under:-
"243-O. Bar to interference by courts in electoral
matters.-Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution -
(a) xxx xxx xxx
(b) no election to any Panchayat shall be called in
question except by an election petition presented to such
authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any
law made by the Legislature of a State."
I n the light of the substantive provisions for filing of election petition
under Section 122 of the Adhiniyam and in view of the aforesaid pronunciation
of law and keeping in view the Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in
W.A. No.809/2022 (Gwalior Bench) dated 11.07.2022 so also looking to the
fact that disputed questions of fact are involved in this case which cannot be
adjudicated in the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage.
Therefore, no interference is warranted at this stage in exercise of powers
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner
would be at liberty to avail the remedy as available to him under Section 122 of
the Adhiniyam at the appropriate time.
Certified copy today.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)
Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF JUDGE
Date: 2022.07.13 18:11:47 IST
HS
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF
Date: 2022.07.13 18:11:47 IST
