NITYANANDA PANDA Vs. RAGHUNATH PADHI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The Petitioner and opposite party No. 1 were the rival candidates nominated for election as Chairman of Umri Panchayat Samiti in Koraput district. In the election, the Petitioner secured five and opposite party No. 1 four votes. Opposite party No. 1 filed an election petition before the Munsif, Jeypore, as the Election Commissioner, questioning the validity of the election and praying that he be declared as having been elected as the Chairman of Umri Panchayat Samiti. The Election Commissioner, by his order dated September 16, 1961, set aside the election of the Petitioner and declared opposite party No. 1 as the duly elected Chairman.

(2.) THE Election Commissioner found that Gopinath Naik, who was a member of Umri Panchayat Samiti on the basis of his being the Sarapanch of Pujatiput Gram Panchayat under Section 16(1)(e) of the Orissa Zilla Parishad Act, 1959, had no right to propose the nomination of the Petitioner as he had ceased to he a member of the Gram Panchayat by reason of his holding an office of profit under the Stated Government as a teacher in the Aided Elementary School of Jayantagiri on the date of election. He held that the Petitioner not having been duly nominated, his election was invalid and opposite party No. 1 being the only other candidate for the election of Chairmanship was declared elected.

(3.) THE first contention of Mr. Panda that Gopinath Naik did not hold an office of profit under the State on the date of the filing of the nomination has no substance. The finding of the Election Commissioner is based on evidence and no error apparent on the face of the record has been brought to our notice to vitiate such finding. In the exercise of the Writ jurisdiction, the finding cannot be disturbed.