JHARMAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IS the provision contained in Section 175(1)(q) which provides that a person having more than two living children shall not be qualified to be the village Sarpanch invalid ? This is the short question that arises in this bunch of four petitions. The counsel have referred to the facts as averred in CWP No. 6335 of 2000. These may be briefly noticed.

(2.) THE petitioner was elected as Sarpanch in March, 2000. Apprehending that he was not qualified to hold the office in view of the provision of Section 175(1)(q) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, he has approached this court through the present petition. He prays that the provision be declared ultra vires the Constitution. While this matter was pending, the petitioner's case was examined by the respondent authorities. Vide order dated January 8, 2001, it was held that the petitioner has 9 children. Therefore, in view of the provision of Section 175(1)(q), he was disqualified to held the post of Sarpanch. The order was conveyed to the petitioner. He has not chosen to amend the petition to challenge this order. However, the petitioner maintains that the provision being unconstitutional, the impugned order is untenable.

(3.) COUNSEL for the parties have been heard.