C PREM KUMAR Vs. PUTTASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal is against the order dtd. 10/8/2023 passed in W.P.No.17450/2022 (LB-ELE) by which while allowing the writ petition, learned Single Judge directed the third respondent -Executive Officer and Designated Officer to receive the nomination papers of the respondent No.1 herein and has further directed that if the nomination papers are submitted by 11.00 a.m. on 14/8/2023, scrutiny to be conducted between 12.00 noon to 12.20 p.m. and to proceed with the election on 16/8/2023 at 11.00 a.m.

(2.) The above writ petition is filed by the respondent No.1 herein contending inter alia that he is an elected representative of Kowdle Grama Panchayat- the respondent No.4 herein. That pursuant to a Notification dtd. 14/6/2023 issued by respondent No.2- Deputy Commissioner, the respondent No.3 was appointed as a designated officer to conduct the election for the post of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha. A notice of the meeting was issued on 24/7/2023 to conduct the election. The calendar of events was issued indicating the date of election as 7/8/2023. In the said notification time for submitting of nominations was fixed between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. of the said date, at the Office of Village Panchayath. The scrutiny of the nomination papers was scheduled between 1.00 p.m. to 1.15 pm.. Withdrawal of the nomination was scheduled between 1.15 p.m. 1.25 p.m. and the election was held to be thereafter.

(3.) The grievance of the respondent No.1 /petitioner is that though on 7/8/2023 he went to the Panchayath Office at about 10.30 a.m. to submit his nomination papers as there was huge crowd in front of Village Panchayath, he was prevented from entering the office and that he was finally able to submit his nomination papers at 10.50 a.m., which was however refused to be received by the respondent No.3 designated officer on the grounds of delay. It is further contended that subsequent to rejection of nomination, meeting could not be held on the same day and was adjourned to 16/8/2023 for want of quorum. That since the meeting is adjourned, the respondent No.1/petitioner sought for direction to the respondent-authorities to receive his nomination papers to contest the election. That the alternate remedy by nature of election petition is not an efficacious remedy. Hence, filed the writ petition.