RUKSAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in the present writ petition, filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for setting aside the order dtd. 1/2/2024 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Nuh, District Nuh; whereby, the petitioner has been removed from the post of Sarpanach of Gram Panchayat Salahka, Tehsil Tauru, District Nuh and order dtd. 30/4/2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Faridabad Division Faridabad, District Faridabad; whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the afore-said order dtd. 1/2/2024 (Annexure P-3), has been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly, the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Village Salahka, in the year 2022. Thereafter, one Nazia, wife of Mustafa, who had also contested against the petitioner and lost the election, lodged a complaint before the Deputy Commissioner, Nuh, alleging that the petitioner had suppressed her true date of birth and had falsely projected her age as 21 years in the nomination papers. It was pointed out that while the petitioner had relied upon a birth certificate showing her date of birth as 17/9/2001, her school records reflected dates of birth as 10/1/2002 and 1/1/2004. On receipt of the complaint, an enquiry was conducted by the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Tauru, who, vide report dtd. 1/12/2022 (Annexure-P-2), concluded that the birth certificate produced by the petitioner had been obtained in a collusive manner. Based on the said enquiry, a show cause notice dtd. 19/1/2024 was issued to the petitioner. After considering petitioner's reply and the material on record, the Deputy Commissioner, vide order dtd. 1/2/2024 (Annexure P-3), came to the conclusion that the petitioner had not attained the age of 21 years as required under Sec. 173 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, and consequently ordered her removal from the post of Sarpanch. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Divisional Commissioner, Faridabad, was also dismissed on 30/4/2024 (Annexure P-4).

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned orders are illegal and without jurisdiction. It is contended that the issue of eligibility or disqualification of an elected Sarpanch can only be adjudicated by way of an election petition under Sec. 176 of the 1994 Act, and not by the Deputy Commissioner under Sec. 51. It is further submitted that the petitioner had produced a valid birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, showing her date of birth as 17/9/2001. The authorities, however, ignored this certificate and erroneously relied upon inconsistent school records. It is argued that the action is politically motivated, as the complainant has already filed an election petition raising the same issues which are pending and therefore, the complaint proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner were not maintainable.