KANSHI RAM Vs. ILLAQA MAGISTRATE CHARKHI DADRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In pursuance of an election petition filed under Section 13-B of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act (for short, the Act) as applicable to Haryana, the election of the petitioner to the office of Sarpanch of village Badhawana, Tehsil Dadri, District Bhiwani was set aside by the Ilaqa Magistrate, Dadri and the said conclusion of that authority has been affirmed by the Appellate Authority, i.e. before the Ilaqa Magistrate was that the nomination papers of the petitioner for election to the office of Sarpanch had wrongly been accepted by the Returning Officer and he in fact stood disqualified for the reason that he was in unauthorised possession of the Panchayat land. In the alternative it was also pleaded that in case he was not in such unauthorised possession then he was in possession of that land as a tenant under the Panchayat. As a result of the trial, the subordinate Authorities, as already indicated, have come to the conclusion that the petitioner was in fact in unauthorised or wrongful possession of the panchayat land. According to these Authorities on that account he stood disqualified and as a result of that conclusion, the respondent who was the only candidate to contest the election and had secured only 13 votes less than the petitioner was declared elected. The finding recorded in this regard on reappraisal of the evidence by the Appellate Authority is contained in para 39 of its judgment and reads as follows :-

(2.) The sole submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the conclusion as recorded above by the subordinate Authorities is not correct in the light of the evidence which is available on record. He maintains that the land in question initially belonged to one Mst. Dakhan and on her death had been mutated in the name of Thula Ram Sukh and subsequently it was again mutated in the name of Gram Panchayat. According to the learned counsel, the panchayat could not possibly succeed to Mst. Dakhan and on that account the entire revenue record wherein the said land has been recorded in the name of the Gram Panchayat has wrongly been prepared.

(3.) In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, I cannot sit as a Court of appeal and go into the reappraisal or weighing of evidence. On the basis of the findings recorded by the subordinate Authorities which have been reproduced above, I do not find any scope for interference in exercise of this extraordinary jurisdiction.