KESHAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed taking exception to the order passed by the prescribed authority under Section 122 of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 dismissing the election petition filed by the petitioner.

(2.) The short controversy involved in this writ petition revolves around the submission related to the "ordinarily place of residence" of the returned candidate-respondent No.4 as Sarpanch of village Borkheda Purvaya. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the respondent No.4 does not ordinarily reside in the said village and instead he is resident of village Piplya Lohad Anjankhut as his name appears in the voter list of that village, hence he was not eligible to file nomination to contest the election of Sarpanch of village Borkheda Purvaya in view of the provisions of Section 5 of Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. Further elaborating his submissions learned counsel contends that in terms of Section 5 of Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam dealing with registration of voters of village submits that every person, who is qualified to be registered in the list of voters prepared for legislative assembly relating to that village or whose name is entered therein and is ordinarily resident of that village shall be entitled to be registered in the list of voters of that village.

(3.) No person shall be entitled to be registered in the list of voters for more than one village and the expression ordinarily resident has been assigned the same meaning as in Section 20 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. It is, therefore, submitted that the Returning Officer had improperly accepted the nomination of respondent No.4, hence his election as Sarpanch was liable to be set aside.