LAWS(ORI)-2019-2-58

TIKAYAT NAIK Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

Decided On February 26, 2019
Tikayat Naik Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ODISHA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition filed by the election petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court in the order dated 16.12.2017 vide Annexure-7 involving rejection of a dispute under Section 26(2) of the Grama Panchayat Act, 1964 involving Balibandha Grama Panchayat under Jhumpura Block of Keonjhar district. The Section 26 (2) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act proceeding before the Collector, Keonjhar was dismissed for devoid of merit.

(2.) Short background involved in the case is that both the petitioner as well as the opposite party no.5 herein were the candidates in the election for the post of Sarpanch, Balibandha Grama Panchayat under Jhumpura Block of Keonjhar district, a reserved seat. During election process, on coming to know that there is some dispute with regard to the date of birth of the opposite party no.5, making him ineligible to contest the election, for being not completed 21 years, the petitioner during the process of Election filed written objection before the Block Development Officer, Jhumpura Blockopposite party no.4 on the date of scrutiny. It is alleged that on keeping the consideration of such application pending, the election was conducted and in the process, opposite party no.5 was declared elected for the post of Sarpanch on the declaration of result on 27.2.2017. It appears, on 10.3.2017, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Collector, Keonjhar-opposite party no.2 for initiating a proceeding under Section 26(2) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act bringing into the notice of the Collector that opposite party no.5 since not completed minimum age of 21 years as on the date of nomination, was ineligible to contest for the post of Sarpanch applying the provision under Section 11(b) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act and that opposite party no.5 has participated in the election on false affidavit involving her date of birth as well as residential certificate. It is further alleged that despite repeated approaches, the Collector did not take appropriate steps within the reasonable period, for which petitioner was compelled to move this Court W.P.(C).No.9284 of 2017, which got disposed of on 19.5.2017 with permission, on withdrawal of the writ petition, to the petitioner for taking resort to proceeding under Section 26(2) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act (hereinafter called as the Act ) to the Collector, Keonjhar. Consequent upon such permission, the petitioner moved the proceeding under Section 26(2) of the Act, which was decided on contest with an order of dismissal. Thus, the writ petition involves the challenge to the said impugned order at Annexure-7.

(3.) Taking to the documents taken in support of the proceeding under Section 26(2) and the provision contained at Section 11(b) of the Act, Mrs. Sujata Jena, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that there is failure of appreciating the allegation involved therein by the Collector and thereby resulting the illegal order of the Collector, which unless be interfered, the impugned order will lead to bad precedent. Mrs. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner taking this Court to the documents taken in support of the plea of the petitioner before the Collector, further taking this Court to the discussions in the dismissal order of the Collector, submitted that there is no proper appreciation on the allegation of the petitioner resulting the bad impugned order assailed in the writ petition. Taking this Court to the documents and the provision at Section 11(b) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act, Mrs.Jena substantiating her contention submitted that for the wrong impugned order, this Court is required to interfere in the impugned order and set aside the same. Mrs. Jena also taking support of two decisions in the case of Debaki Jani v. The Collector and another, 2014 1 OrissaLR 867 (FB) and in the case of K.Venkatachalam v. A.Swamickan and another, 1999 AIR(SC) 1723, submitted that for the decisions referred to herein above even though a proceeding under Section 26 (2) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act is not maintainable yet High Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can interfere in such dispute and grant appropriate relief.