SACHIDANANDA MAHAKUD Vs. MANSAS RANJAN SAMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE both the writ petitions arise out of Election Petition No. 16 of 2012 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jaipur and parties are same in both the writ petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) IN WP (C) No. 2804 of 2013 Challenge has been made by the petitioner in this writ petition to the order dated 28.1.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division). Jajpur in Election Petition Case No. 16 of 2012 rejection the application filed under Order 6, Rule.17 of the Civil Procedure Coe for amendment of the objection.

(3.) THE petitioner contested the election for the post of Sarpanch of Udayanathpur Grama Panchayat in the district of Jajpur. He was disqualified to contest the election on the ground that he has three children. As such, he was disqualified to contest the election. It was specifically averred that the third child was born after cut off date, i.e. on 4.7.2008. After receiving notice in the election petition, the petitioner filed his show cause taking a specific stand that the third child as alleged by the election petitioner does not belongs to him: rather belongs to his younger brother. The election petitioner manipulating the register of Anganwadi Centre and Vaccination Centre has falsely alleged that the petitioner has got three children. However, the election petitioner though filed the election petition did not deposit the security amount along with the election petition. Therefore, the election petition was not properly presented before the Court below. The date of deposit of the security amount was the date of presentation of the election petition, i.e. on 6.4.2012. Therefore, the petition was barred by limitation. However, by filing the show cause the writ petitioner had not specifically taken that ground. It was neither pleaded by the election petitioner in the election petition nor was a copy of the application to accept the security deposit served on the petitioner to raise that objection, when the said fact came to his knowledge. He had filed an application for amendment of his show cause to answer only the fact regarding deposit of the security amount at a belated stage, i.e. on 6.4.2012 which violates the mandatory provision of the Grama Panchayat Act and therefore the election petition is liable to be dismissed on the said ground.