Nihal Singh Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 21495 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Nihal Singh Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2024

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

                                                              1                                  WA-414-2024
                               IN      THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT GWALIOR
                                                          BEFORE
                                             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                                             &
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
                                                  ON THE 7 th OF AUGUST, 2024
                                                  WRIT APPEAL No. 414 of 2024
                                                   NIHAL SINGH GURJAR
                                                          Versus
                                        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                                Shri Lokendra Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                                Shri    Vivek    Khedkar,    Additional     Advocate   General      for   the
                          respondents/State.
                                Shri Ajay Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the respondent No.3

                                                               ORDER

Per: Justice Vivek Rusia The appellant/respondent has filed this writ appeal challenging the order dated 17.1.2024 whereby writ petition No.23051/2023 filed by Nihal Singh s/o Mangal Singh Gurjar has been disposed of by directing the respondent/competent authority to decide the pending representation.

Writ petitioner Nihal Singh filed the writ petition complaining that present appellant is disqualified to hold the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat on account of conviction vide judgment dated 7.8.2015 under Section 325/149 of I.P.C. Against the said judgment, he filed criminal appeal which has been dismissed. Thereafter, criminal revision was filed which is pending.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the writ petition has been disposed of without giving any opportunity of hearing to him. Had an opportunity

2 WA-414-2024

been given to him he would have objected about the maintainability of the writ petition for want of alternative remedy.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that if the writ petitioner is aggrieved by election of the appellant, he ought to have filed election petition immediately after election, hence, the writ petition is not maintainable and ought to have been dismissed.

In view of law laid by the Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Choudhary vs. Atarlal Verma and others reported in 2006 (3) MPLJ 506 the writ in the nature of quo-warranto is maintainable if the elected candidate is not eligible to contest the election, therefore, the writ petition is very much maintainable. Order 17.1.2024 is set aside and same be restored and be listed as a writ of quo-warranto. The appellant may raise all the objections in the writ petition.

C.C. as per rules.

                                     (VIVEK RUSIA)                              (RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
                                         JUDGE                                          JUDGE


                          Ahmad