Sandhya Bairagi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 9961 MP

                                                                1
                                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                          AT JABALPUR
                                                              BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
                                                        ON THE 20th OF JULY, 2022

                                                  WRIT PETITION No. 12839 of 2022

                                        Between:-
                                        SANDHYA BAIRAGI W/O SHRI PRAKASH
                                        BAIRAGI,    AGED     ABOUT 48   YEARS,
                                        OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O HATHIYAGDH,
                                        DISTRICT- KATNI (M.P.)

                                                                                           .....PETITIONER
                                        (NONE FOR THE PETITIONER)

                                        AND

                                1.      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                        ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF
                                        PANCHAYAT MANTRALAYA GOVERNEMNT OF
                                        M.P. VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL M.P.
                                        (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                2.      THE      COLLECTOR   (PANCHAYAT)  CUM
                                        RETURNING OFFICER KATNI DISTRICT KATNI
                                        (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                3.      THE TEHSILDAR/ REGISTRATION OFFICER
                                        (PANCHAYAT) KATN I BAHORIBAND DISTRICT
                                        KATNI (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                4.      B.L.O. / AUTHORISED OFFICER KATN I GRAM
                                        PANCHAYAT HITHIYAGRADH BAHORIBAND
                                        DISTRICT KATNI M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                5.      M.P. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION THROUGH
                                        C E C NIRWACHAN BHAWAN 58 ARERA HILLS
                                        BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                                        (SHRI PRAVANLAGHN PANDEY - ADVOCATE FOR
                                        RESPONDENTS NO.3 AND 5)
Signature Not Verified
  SAN

                                      This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
Digitally signed by VARSHA
CHOURASIYA
Date: 2022.07.20 17:58:19 IST
                                following:
                                                                     2
                                                                     ORDER

In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to include her name in the voter list of Gram Panchayat Hathiyagarh, District Katni and she be permitted to file her nomination for coming Gram Panchayat Elections, 2022 treating her as the local resident of Gram Panchayat Hathiyagarh, District Katni.

It is stated in the petitioner that in this regard the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent on 04.06.2022 in accordance with Rule 77(2) r/w Rule 80(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Nirvachan Niyam, 1995, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1995'); but no action whatsoever

has been taken by the respondent to decide the application. In these circumstances, direction may be issued to respondent to decide the same in accordance with aforesaid provision at the earliest.

Per contra, Shri Pandey opposed the aforesaid contention and submitted that various disputed questions of fact are involved in the present case and the Panchayat elections are already over; and such disputed questions can only be adjudicated 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 been notified on 27.05.2022 and thereafter results have already 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 Signature Not Verified

have been notified and now results have already been declared. However, he SAN

Digitally signed by VARSHA CHOURASIYA Date: 2022.07.20 17:58:19 IST 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 referred to as "the Adhiniyam") after the election is over.

Constitutional amendment has been brought in the Constitution 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.

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.

Signature Not Verified SAN

Certified copy today.

Digitally signed by VARSHA CHOURASIYA Date: 2022.07.20 17:58:19 IST

(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE vc

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VARSHA CHOURASIYA Date: 2022.07.20 17:58:19 IST