MANGE RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE are called upon to pronounce in this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the constitution upon the validity of the co-option of Mst. Nanhti respondent No. 4 as a panch and upon the election of Dhan Singh respondent No. 5 as Sarpanch of the gram Panchayat Pichoppa Kalan,tahsil Charkhi Dadri,district Mohindergarh (Haryana) (hereinafter called the Panchayat) in the circumstances hereinafter mentioned.

(2.) MANGE Ram petitioner No. 1,dhan singh,chander and Rameshwar,respondents nos. 5 to 7 one Jai Chand,and one member of a Scheduled Caste namely pahlad,were elected as Panchas of the Panchayat in the election held on July 5,1971. Notice (Annexure 'a') was issued by the Block Development and panchayat Officer (respondent No. 3) on December 13,1971 to all the above mentioned Panchas for holding a meeting of the elected Panchas at 8 a. m. on december 17,1971 for co-opting a woman Panch for the Panchayat,under rule 4 of the Haryana Gram Panchayat (Co-option of Women Panchas) Rules,1971 (hereinafter referred to as the co-option Rules ). On the same day respondent No. 3 issued another notice (Annexure 'b') to all the Panchas for electing a Sarpanch of the Punchayat under R. 39 of the Haryana Gram Panchayat Election Rules 1971 (hereinafter called the Election Rules) at 10. 30 a. m. on December 17,1971. Both the notices were received by Mange Ram petitioner on December 14,1971.

(3.) NANHTI respondent No. 4 was declared elected as a co-opted woman Panch defeating her rival candidate Mst. Shanti Petitioner No. 2 in the meeting held at 8 am. on December 17,1971. In the second meeting in which Nanhti also voted dhan Singh respondent No. 5 was declared elected as Sarpanch defeating Mange ram petitioner. On December 23,1971 this joint petition was filed by Mange Ram and Shanti impugning the co-option of respondent No. 4 and election of respondent No. 5 as Sarpanch. In contesting the petition respondent No. 1 (the state of Haryana) respondent No. 2 (the inspector Co-operative Society,charkhi dadri,who presided over the two meetings),and respondent No. 5 (the elected sarpanch) have filed separate written statements. The petitioners have filed a replication in reply to the written statement of respondent No. 5.