GOBIND CH PANDA Vs. DARSAN CH ROUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution asking for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order passed by the Munsif of Balasore exercising the powers of an Election Commissioner under the provisions of the orissa Pan-chayat Samiti and Zilla Parishads Act (No. 7 of 1960) (hereinafter referred to as the Act.)

(2.) THE petitioner and opposite parties 1, 2 and 3 were candidates in the contest for the office of the Chairman of the Khaira Panchayat Samiti in the district of balasore. The election was held on 7-1-68. and the petitioner was declared elected as the Chairman. Opposite party No. 1 thereupon made an election petition before the Munsif of Balasore who is the Commissioner duly appointed under the aforesaid Act. and the said application came to be registered as Election Misc. Case No. 1 of 1968. The election was sought to be challenged on various grounds, and one of them material for our present purpose was that the petitioner had incurred the disqualification prescribed under Section 25 (1) (b) of the Orissa grama Panchayat Act, 1964, read together with Section 16 (3) (a) of the Act. The facts constituting the said disqualification were as follows :

(3.) THE petitioner was a member and. also the cashier of the Khaira Co-operative stores and had misappropriated funds. In an audit made under Section 67 (1) of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (Act 2 of 1963) a sum of Rs. 910-02 was found due from the petitioner. The Society raised a demand against the petitioner, passed resolutions and ultimately lodged a claim in Dispute Case No. 334 of 1966-67 before the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Balasore. The petitioner did not admit his liability for the aforesaid amount and contended that he had not incurred the disqualification in question. The Election Commissioner raised several issues for determination in the case. The material issue touching this aspect of the matter was issue No. 2. The Election commissioner, by his decision dated 31-3-69, came to hold that the petitioner was disqualified on the aforesaid score and rejected all the other grounds for his disqualification as raised by the opposite party No. 1. No other statutory remedy is provided under the Act against the decision of the Election Commissioner, and the petitioner, therefore, came up before this Court to quash the order of the Election commissioner.