GURNAM SINGH Vs. LAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer. Election Tribunal. Moga, dated 27.9.1999. Vide impugned order the learned Judge allowed an application filed by the petitioner in an Election Petition filed under Section 76 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act')

(2.) LAL Singh petitioner, had challenged the election of respondent No. 1 Gurnam Singh as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat (sic) Kalan District Moga and had further prayed in the petition that election of the said respondent be set aside and the petitioner be declared as elected. The election was also challenged on various grounds. After issuance of notice to the respondents and when reply was filed by the respondents, also taking an objection that Rupinder Singh was also a necessary party to the petition, an application for amendment of the election petition was filed with a limited prayer that in order to avoid legal objection, the name of Rupinder Singh be added as respondent No. 4 in the original petition. It was specifically stated that the basic facts and fundamental character of the election petition would remain to be the same and no prejudice would be caused to the non-applicants.

(3.) THE cumulative effect of the reading of the above provisions is that there being no specific provision of which the petitioner committed a default by not adding the name of respondent No. 4 when there is no relief, substantial or otherwise, claimed against the said respondent No. 4 within the purview and scope of the provisions of the Act. As such the petition of the petitioner would not fall within the mischief of the stringent provisions of Rule 52 of the Rules. General provisions of the Code would come to the aid of the Tribunal for procedural progress and disposal of the petition so far they are in harmony and do not defeat the purpose of the special enactment i.e. the Act and the Rules framed thereunder.