KARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the official respondents to reserve seat for scheduled caste member in the Gram Panchayat Village Hariyoo Jattan, District Patiala. A writ of certiorari has also been sought for quashing order dated 2nd May, 2008, passed by Deputy Director, Panchayat, vide which no seat was reserved for scheduled caste and backward class.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that reservation for scheduled caste members has not been made in the Gram Panchayat of village Hariyoo Jattan, District Patiala in proportion to the population of scheduled caste residents of the village.

(3.) In the reply submitted by the State, it has been stated that in the year 2008, two Gram Sabhas were formed namely, Gram Sabha Harlyoo Khurd and Gram Sabha Harlyoo Jattan. In village Harlyoo Jattan there were five posts of Panches. Out of these five posts, three were meant for general category and two for women category. This was done keeping in view the population of men and women in the village. Stand of the State is that no person in the village belongs to scheduled caste. In support of its stand, the State has relied on document, Annexure R-1, which gives the figures relating to population of Gram Panchayat Harlyoo Khurd and Gram Panchayat Harlyoo Jattan. This apart, learned State counsel has submitted that election of the Gram Panchayat has already been held and the same could have been called in question only by way of election petition and not by invoking writ jurisdiction of this court. He has relied upon judgment Prithvi Raj v. State Election Commission, Punjab and others, 2007 3 RCR(Civ) 817 in support of his contention.