POONAM MAURYA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Singh Rathor/Mr. Madhur Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the Staterespondents, Mr. Harish Chandra Dwivedi and Mr. Navneet Singh, holding the brief of Mr. D.K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for respondent No. 7.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that petitioner was elected as Gram Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat Dhanauri, Block and Tehsil Swar, District Rampur in pursuant to the election held on 15/4/2021. In respect to the aforementioned election, an election petition under Sec. 12C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") has been filed by respondent No. 7/Smt. Shobha Rani before the SubDivisional Magistrate/Prescribed Authority, on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible for contesting the election of Gram Pradhan. The Prescribed Authority framed 11 issues in the election petition. An application was filed to decide the issue Nos. 1, 3 and 5 as preliminary issues. The petitioner filed reply to the election petition, denying the allegation made in the election petition, stating that petitioner was not holding the post of Shiksha Mitra at the time of filing her nomination. The petitioner also filed her objection to the application filed by the election petitioner to decide the issue Nos. 1, 3 and 5 as preliminary issues. The Prescribed Authority/S.D.M. vide order dtd. 28/7/2023 allowed the election petition and declared the election of the petitioner for the post of Gram Pradhan as void. The Prescribed Authority has also declared the post of Gram Pradhan vacant in respect to gram panchayat Dhanauri, Block and Tehsil Swar, District Rampur. The petitioner challenged the order of the Prescribed Authority dtd. 28/7/2023 by way of revision under Sec. 12C(6) of the Act before the District Judge which was registered as Revision No. 24 of 2023, wherein specific ground was taken that election petition was not presented by election petitioner herself, as such, the election petition cannot be entertained. Respondent No. 7/Smt. Shobha Rani also filed a revision which was registered as Revision No. 26 of 2023 with the prayer that after declaring the election of the petitioner as void, respondent No. 7 should be declared elected as Gram Pradhan as respondent No. 7 was on 2nd position in the election held on 15/4/2021. The revisional court/District Judge vide order dtd. 9/1/2024 dismissed both the revisions, hence, this writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

(3.) This Court vide order dtd. 4/3/2024 entertained the matter, issued notice to respondent Nos. 8 to 15 as respondent No. 7 was represented by the counsel. All the respondents were directed to file counteraffidavit in the matter. In pursuance of the order dtd. 4/3/2024, respondent No. 7 has filed her counteraffidavit as well as learned standing counsel has also filed his counteraffidavit. Petitioner has filed his rejoinder affidavit in the matter.