DARBARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly the case of the petitioners is that in the election of the Gram Panchayat of village Dasondhasingh Wala, Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur (hereinafter referred to as the Panchayat), eight persons, namely the petitioners, respondent No.2 and three others, filed nomination papers on June 29, 1972. Out of them, five persons were to be elected as Panches. Three of them withdrew their nomination papers. Thereafter, the petitioners and respondent No.2 were left in the field. An objection was raised against the nomination paper of respondent No. 2 on the ground that he was in possession of the Panchayat land and, therefore, he could not be elected as Panch of the Panchayat. The objection was up held and his nomination paper was rejected. Consequently, the petitioners were declared as Panches. Sukhdev Singh, respondent No. 2 filed an election petition against the election of the petitioners which was entrusted to respondent No. 1 for decision. He accepted the election petition vide order dated January 23, 1973, and held that the nomination paper of respondent No. 2 had been illegally rejected. Consequently, he set aside the election as a whole. The petitioners have challenged the order of respondent No. 1 dated January 23, 1973.

(2.) It is firstly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that respondent No. 2 was in possession of the Panchayat land and therefore, he could not contest election of a Panch. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, but am not impressed with the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners. Section 6(5) of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) enumerates the persons who are not entitled to stand for election of Panch and Sarpanch. Clause (1) of sub- section (5) puts a restriction on a tenant or lessee holding a tenancy or lease under the Gram Sabha and a person who is in arrears of rent of any lease or tenancy held under the Gram Sabha, to contest election. In the present case, it was stated that respondent No. 2 was in forcible possession of the land in dispute. A person who is in forcible possession of any land cannot be said to be a tenant or a lessee. The word 'tenant' has not been defined in the Act, but it has been stated in the defining section that the aforesaid expression shall have the same meaning as in the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. According to that Act, 'tenant' means "a person who holds land under another person, and is, or but for a special contract would be, liable to pay rent for that land to that other person.....". A reading of the aforesaid definition shows that a person can be a tenant who is liable to pay rent to another person under whom he is holding land. In the present case, the allegation is that he was in forcible possession of the property in dispute. In the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be held that respondent No. 2 was a tenant and suffered from disability to contest the election. In this view I am fortified by the observations of this Court in Maman Singh V/s. The Resident Magistrate and others,1965 CurLJ 37(Pb.), and Hazara Singh V/s. B.S. Malik and others,1967 PunLR 136.

(3.) It is then contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Executive Magistrate could not set aside the election of the petitioners, in case he came to the conclusion that the nomination paper of respondent No. 2 had been illegally rejected. He submits that there were five seats of Panches and only five candidates were left in the field, that is, the petitioners and respondent No. 2. According to him, in case the nomination paper of respondent No. 2 had been illegally rejected then the election as a whole was not effected in any way. The learned counsel argues that at the most the Executive Magistrate could declare him as elected. I have considered the matter but do not find any substance in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners. In order to appreciate the contention, it will be necessary to refer to some of the provisions of the Act.