MANGLA Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, a returned candidate, who was elected as Sarpanch of Idaratpura, Tehsildar and District Khargone against the order dtd. 16/12/2022, passed by the respondent No.3/Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Khargone in Revision No.45/2022-202,3 wherein, in an Election Petition filed by the respondent No.3 challenging the election of the petitioner, the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC has been rejected.

(2.) In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Idaratpura, Tehsildar and District Khargone on 14/7/2022, which was challenged by the respondent No. 3 in an Election Petition preferred under Sec. 122 of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam 1993. In the aforesaid proceedings, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC was filed by the petitioner on various grounds, inter alia that the caste certificate of the petitioner, who belongs to a Scheduled Caste cannot be challenged in the election petition.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Addl. Commr., Tribal Development reported as (1994) 6 SCC 241, the aforesaid application was filed by the petitioner but it has been rejected by the respondent No.2 vide impugned order dtd. 16/12/2022. Counsel has further submitted that the learned Member of the Election Tribunal had erred in rejecting the application, as it is a settled law that the veracity of the caste certificate can only be decided by a high level committee as has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra). No other ground has been raised before this court by the learned counsel for the petitioner.