KAILASHBAI Vs. DEUBAI & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 30.01.2018 by which the Sub Divisional Officer- cum-prescribed authority has rejected the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC. The petitioner has filed the election petition challenging the election of respondent No.1 to the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Khateyakhedi. In the election petition, the petitioner is seeking following relief:

(2.) After notice in the election petition, the elected Sarpanch Deu Bai filed the written statement on 007.2015 and thereafter, the issues have been framed for adjudciation. The respondent No.1 filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC seeking dismissal of the election petition on the ground that the election petitioner has not filed the certificate dated 26.02015 by which the election result was notified.

(3.) The petitioner opposed the said application and by order dated 30.08.2016 the SDO has dismissed the election petition. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of election petition, the petitioner filed W.P.No.6466/2017. By order dated 11.05.2017, the writ Court has allowed the writ petition with the observation that the SDO ought to have given an opportunity to the petitioner to clarify the prayer clause. The writ Court has also observed that the prayer for setting aside of the election of return candidate is implicit. Relevant portion of the aforesaid order is reproduced below: