PALE RAM Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against order dated 7.10.2005 (P-4) passed by respondent 2 and the order dated 17.1.2006 (P-6) passed by respondent 1.

(2.) According to the afore-mentioned order, the petitioner's wife gave birth to 6th child on 9.5.1995, which attracts dis-qualification under Section 175 (q) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for brevity, "the Act"). Respondent No.2, Deputy Commissioner, Jind, vide his order dated 9.10.2005, while exercising the powers under Section 51(3) of the Act, dismissed the petitioner from the position of Sarpanch and declared the position of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Pindara, as vacant. The aforementioned order was challenged in appeal filed under Section 51 (5) of the Act before respondent No.1. A perusal of the order dated 17.1.2006 shows that a wrong certificate had earlier been issued showing the date of birth of 6th child as 19.5.1994 so as to bring the birth of the child before the cut off date. However, after enquiry, it has been found as a fact that the afore-mentioned certificate has been issued illegally by an official who has been penalised and the correct date of birth of the child is 9.5.1995, which is obviously after the cut off date attracting dis-qualification under Section 175 (q) of the Act.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel, we are of the view that no interference by this Court would be warranted as pure finding of fact has been recorded by both the authorities in the impugned orders. The law on the afore-mentioned proposition is absolutely clear and the dis- qualification laid down under Section 175 (q) of the Act is attracted. Therefore, there is no ground to interfere. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.