VIKRAM SINGH BHANDARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We allowed the writ petition in part vide our order dated 21-12-2001 and held that the petitioner did not resign as member of Zila Panchayat voluntarily and, therefore, acceptance of his resignation was quashed. Consequently, we further held that the vacancy did not occur. Therefore, election of respondent No. 5 Mahendra Singh Mer as member of Zila Panchayat, Almora, was set aside. The petitioner was ordered to be treated as member of Zila Panchayat, Almora. The petition was allowed on 21-12-2001 for the reasons to follow later on.

(2.) Now we proceed to record our reasons. A very short but interesting question raised to be decided in this writ petition is as to whether resignation of the petitioner was voluntary and valid in the eye of law ?

(3.) The petitioner was holding the elected office of member of Zila Panchayat, Almora. According to the petitioner from the newspapers published on 7-6-2000, he came to know that his resignation has been accepted. Then on the same day he made a representation to the District Authorities that he had not resigned and if any resignation had been accepted, it was a forged, as he had never tendered his resignation. The petitioner also challenged the authority of the Chairman, Zila Panchayat, Almora on the ground that he ceased to be Chairman, Zila Panchayat, Almora as he had become member of Zila Panchayat, District-Bageshwar. During the course of pendency of the writ petition two other new grounds were added challenging the election notified for the constituency which was being represented by the petitioner.