SHISHPAL SINGH Vs. DILAWAR SINGH AND A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the election to the post of Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha Ram Vir Singh was declared elected. He had obtained 298 votes. Dilawar Singh had secured 278 votes while the appellant Shishpal Singh got 196 votes. Dilawar Singh challenged the election by an election petition. He raised variety of charges of corrupt practice, etc., against Ram Vir Singh, the successful candidate. During the pendency of the election petition Ram Vir Singh died somewhere in June, 1973. At the hearing of the election petition one of the questions argued was whether the election petition had abated. The Tribunal held that it stood abated. The Tribunal, however, went into the merits and held that the election petitioner had failed to prove any of the charges levelled by him against the successful candidate. On this ground the election petition was dismissed.

(2.) DILAWAR Singh, the election petitioner, came to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. A learned Single Judge held that in view of the third proviso to Rule 25 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules the election petition did not abate because the successful candidate was not the sole respondent in the election petition. The third candidate Shishpal Singh was also a respondent. The learned Judge thereafter observed: - "Under sub-rule (3) of Rule 25 of the Rules two alternatives are open when the election is set aside. Either a casual vacancy may be created or another candidate may be declared duly elected. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had secured 308 votes in his favour while Shish Pal Singh poled 196 votes in his favour. This position is not disputed by the counsel for the respondent. Since there does not appear to be any controversy on this point, I think it expedient in the interest of justice that instead of holding a fresh election the petitioner may be declared as elected." On this view the writ petition was allowed and Dilawar Singh was declared elected as Pradhan. Aggrieved, Shishpal Singh has come up in appeal. As observed by the learned Single Judge the two alternatives arise under sub-rule (3) of Rule 25 only when the election of the successful candidate is set aside or declared invalid. In the present case the Election Tribunal specifically found that the charges levelled against the successful candidate had not been proved and that the petition had abated. The election petition was dismissed. The necessary result was that the election of the successful candidate, which was an event which happened long before his death, was held to be valid. This is not a case where the election of any person was found to be invalid by the Election Tribunal. Consequently sub-rule (3) of Rule 25 was not at all attracted.

(3.) THUS when a vacancy arises in the office of Pradhan by reason of his death, the vacancy can be filled in only by an election. In such a contingency any person, who may have been a candidate in the previous election, cannot possibly be declared to be duly elected Pradhan. The learned Single Judge was in error in declaring Dilawar Singh as elected to the post of Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha.