BANESWAR BISWAL Vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner calls in question legality of acceptance of nomination paper of opp. party No. 4 for election to the office of Sarpanch of Ruguda Grama Panchayat under the Orissa Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 (in short, 'the Act'). According to the petitioner, opp. patty No. 4 was not eligible to contest as he had more than two children by the appointed date.

(2.) THE learned Additional Government Advocate raised a preliminary objection as regards maintainability of the application on the ground that an election dispute can be raised.

(3.) THERE is another hurdle on the part of the petitioner to maintain the writ application. Article 230 of the Constitution of India. 1950 (in short, 'the Constitution') puts an embargo on entertaining a dispute relating to election. The said provision reads as follows : '243O. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution - (a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of seats to such constituencies made or purporting to be made under Article 243K, shall not be called in question in any Court : (b) no election to any Panchayat shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State.'' In Anugrah Narain Singh and another etc. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others :(1996) 3 SCJ 235, at paragraph 15 the Apex Court observed as follows : ' In Laxmi Charan Sen v. A.K.M. Masson Uzzaman : (1985)4 SCC 689. this Court was dealing with Part XV of the Constitution which deals with preparation of electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all ejections to Parliament, and to the Legislatures of different States and all elections to the offices of the President and the Vice -President. We are in this case. concerned with the elections to municipal bodies. But the principles laid down in Laxmi .Charan Sen's case will apply in full force to municipal elections because various Articles dealing with holding of municipal elections in Part IX -A of the Constitution are similarly worded. In fact, highest importance has been attached to holding of panchayat as wail as municipal elections by the Constitution, Parts IX and IX -A of the Constitution were introduced by the Constitution (73rd Amendment) Act, 1992 and (74th Amendment) Act, 1992. By these two Parts, it was intended to take democracy to the grassroot level. Part IX deals with constitution of Panchayats, composition of Panchayats, and holding of regular elections to the panchayats. Article, 243K contains a bar to interference by Court in electoral matters. This bar is similar to the bar contained in Article 329 of the Constitution in Part XV, the implication of which was explained by this Court in the case of Laxmi Charan Sen (supra).' In State of U. P. v. Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti : AIR 1995 SC 1512, at Page 15 2b the apex Court observed as follows : 'What, is more objectionable in the approach of the High Court is that although Clause (a) of Article 243K of the Constitution enacts a bar on the interference by the Court in electoral matters including the questioning of the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of the constituencies or the allotment of seats to such constituencies made or purported to be made under Article 243K and the election to any panchayat, the High Court has gone into question of the validity of the delimitation of the constituencies and also the allotment of seats to them.'