Telangana High Court
Marennagari Vishvanatham vs Rajanagaram Ramakrishna And 5 ... on 11 August, 2022
Bench: P.Sree Sudha
HON'BLE Smt. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.306 of 2022
ORDER
1. This revision is directed against the order dated
22.12.2021 passed in I.A.No.123 of 2021 in EOP No.4 of 2019
on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge,
Wanaparthy, whereby the application filed by the petitioner-first
respondent under Order 7 Rule 11(d) read with Section 151 CPC
is dismissed.
2. EOP No.4 of 2019 is filed by one Rajanagaram
Ramakrishna-against Marennagari Vishwanatham and others
to declare that the election of the first respondent for the post of
Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Nirvin Village of Kothakota
Mandal, is null and void in view of disqualification under
Section 21(3) of the Act and to declare him as elected for the
post of Sarpanch.
3. During the pendency of EOP, the petitioner-first
respondent filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC to
reject the EOP. The trial Court after hearing the arguments of
both the counsel dismissed the application. The trial Court in
its order observed that the question of disqualification on the
ground that the petitioner-first respondent is having three
children will be decided only after full fledge trial and
accordingly dismissed the said application. Moreover, the
petitioner-first respondent approached the Office of the District
Collector and gave an application stating that the petitioner in
the O.P. is having three children and District Collector informed
him to approach the competent authority and to take action as
per Section 242 of the Telangana Panchayath Raj Act and also
as per G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 24.01.2019.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and the learned counsel appearing for respondents.
5. The EOP is filed before the Junior Civil Judge at
Wanaparthy. Learned counsel for the petitioner herein would
mainly contend that the Election O.P. is to be filed before the
District Court but not before the Junior Civil Judge's Court and
hence requested the Court to set aside the order. The learned
counsel also relied upon a judgment of this Court in
GARREPELLI SADANANDAM V/s. STATE OF TELANGANA1 in
which it was held that the authority competent to take decision
with regard to disqualification of a member is the District Judge
MANU/TL/0381/2020
and the authorities are required to approach the Court within
the time specified under the Act.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-petitioner
filed a copy of the letter given by the District Collector on
07.02.2019 and also the copy of G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 29.01.2019
in which it was specifically stated that 'Junior Civil Judge'
means the Junior Civil Judge appointed under the Telangana
Civil Courts Act, 1972 and argued that his client filed EOP
before the proper Court.
7. The election OP is filed to declare the election of a
Sarpanch as null and void as the petitioner in EOP is
disqualified and having more than three children. In this
context, this Court finds it reasonable to verify the provision
under Section 28 of the Act, which reads as follows:
'28. Bar of Jurisdiction:-- No order passed or proceedings
taken under the provisions of this Act shall be called in
question in any Court, in any suit, or application, and no
injunction shall be granted by any Court except the Gram
Panchayat Tribunal or a District Court in respect of any
action taken or about to be taken in pursuance of any
power conferred by or under this Act.'
8. No doubt, the Government issued G.O. in the year 2019
but the judgment of the High Court on which the petitioner-first
respondent is relying was pertaining to the year 2020. In the
said judgment it was specifically held that District Court is
having jurisdiction and even in the enactment it was clearly
stated either the Gram Panchayat Tribunal or a District Court is
having jurisdiction. Therefore, basing on the letter addressed by
the District Collector considering the G.O. the EOP is filed
before the Junior Civil Judge's Court is not proper and the trial
Court is directed to return the EOP for presentation before the
proper forum i.e. District Court. As the order passed by the trial
Court is without jurisdiction, it is not valid and is accordingly
set aside.
9. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed by
setting aside the order dated 22.12.2021 passed in I.A.No.123 of
2021 in EOP No.4 of 2019 on the file of the learned Principal
Junior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy.
10. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this revision
shall stand closed in the light of this final order.
____________________
P.SREE SUDHA, J.
11th AUGUST, 2022.
PGS
