Mahendra vs Kailash Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8602 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7704/2022

Mahendra S/o Poker Ram, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Village Mokhab Kalla, Tehsil Sheo, District Barmer, Rat Present Residing Baldev Nagar, Barmer.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Kailash Singh S/o Sawai Singh, By Caste Rajput, R/o Hathisingh Ka Gaon, Tehsil Sheo, District Barmer.

2. Joga Ram S/o Heraj Ram, By Caste Jat R/o Kashmir, Tehsil Sheo, District Barmer.

3. Lachha Ram S/o Simratha Ram, By Caste Jat R/o Gorsiyo Ka Talla, Kashmir, Tehsil Sheo, District Barmer.

4. Mohan Lal S/o Koshla Ram, By Caste Jat R/o Jiyanio Ki Dhani, Ramderiya Kashmir, Tehsil Sheo, District Barmer.

5. Returning Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sheo, District Barmer.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. RJ Punia
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Sanjay Nahar



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

                         Judgment / Order

04/07/2022

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner was elected as a member of Panchayat Samiti, Sheo

and, thereafter, he has been elected as Pradhan of the aforesaid

Samiti. It is further submitted that election of the petitioner on the

post of member as well as Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti was

challenged by way of an election petition on the ground that the

petitioner was charged under Section 3 of the Prevention of

Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred as the

"Act of 1984"), however, he has not disclosed the information in

(2 of 3) [CW-7704/2022]

his nomination form regarding framing of charge and, as such, it

is submitted that since the petitioner was charged for the offence

under Section 3 to the Act of 1984, therefore, he was disqualified

from the post of member of the Panchayat Samiti by purview of

Section 19 (gg) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.

It is further argued that the petitioner has moved an

application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC with a prayer for dismissal

of the election petition on the ground that as the petitioner is

charged for the offence under Section 3 of the Act of 1984 and the

provision for imprisonment for the offence under Section 3 is up to

five years only, the provisions of Section 19 (gg) of the Act of

1994 could not attract in the case of the petitioner but the Election

Tribunal has rejected the application vide impugned order dated

05.05.2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the

decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Rajeev

Chaudhary Vs. State (NCT) of Delhi reported in (2001)5 SCC 34

and argued that the Election Tribunal has grossly erred in rejecting

the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC while holding that

though the provision of imprisonment under Section 3 of the Act

of 1984 is up to five years only, it cannot be said that the

provision of Section 19 (gg) of the Act of 1994 could not be

attracted.

Mr. Sanjay Nahar has put in appearance on behalf of

respondent No.1 as caveator. Copy of the writ petition has already

been supplied to him. He prays for some time to complete his

instructions.

Time prayed for is granted.

List the matter on 14.07.2022.

(3 of 3) [CW-7704/2022]

In the meantime, further proceedings in connection with the

Election Petition No.8/21 titled as Kailash Singh Vs. Mahendra &

Ors. pending in the court of Senior Civil Judge, Barmer shall

remain stayed.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J 112-mohit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)