RAMKISHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 20.5.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.10 vide which his election petition dated 24.2.2016 (Annexure P-2) was dismissed on the ground of limitation despite the filing of separate application dated 24.2.2016 (Annexure P-3) for condonation of delay. Further, a prayer has been made for quashing the result dated 10.1.2016 (Annexure P-8) of Ward No.5 for the post of Panch of village Dongra declaring respondent No.9 as winning Panch. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the official respondents to recount the votes of Ward No.5, Gram Panchayat, Dongra Ahir, Tehsil Kanina, District Mahendergarh for which application dated 29.4.2016 (Annexure P-4) was filed before respondent No.10. Also a prayer has been made directing the official respondents to declare the petitioner as elected Panch of Gram Panchayat, Dongra Ahir, Tehsil Kanina, District Mahendergarh as he was declared elected Panch of Ward No.5 but oath letter was issued in the name of respondent No.9 by the polling officers after recording the votes vice versa in the result (Annexure P-8).

(2.) A few facts necessary for adjudicating of the instant petition as narrated therein may be noticed. The election of Gram Panchayat Dongra Ahir, Tehsil Kanina, District Mahendergarh was held on 10.1.2016 for various posts. The petitioner and respondent No.9 contested for the post of Panch of Ward No.5. After voting, the counting was done on 10.1.2016 in the evening in which total 200 votes were polled out of which 30 votes were cancelled. Out of 170 votes, the petitioner had secured 92 votes whereas respondent No. 9 secured 78 votes and the petitioner was declared winning candidate of Ward No.5. However, no certificate was given in the evening on 10.1.2016. The oath ceremony of the Panches and Sarpanches were to be held on 16.2.2016. On 12.2.2016, Panchayat Secretary came in the village and informed respondent No.9 for participating in the oath ceremony to be held on 16.2.2016. The petitioner made enquiries and came to know that the Presiding Officer had wrongly recorded the secured votes of the petitioner and respondent No.9 vice versa. Accordingly, he made a representation dated 15.2.2016 (Annexure P-6) to respondent No.2 for preparing the correct result and declaring him the winning candidate. When no action was taken by the official respondents, the petitioner filed an election petition dated 25.2.2016 (Annexure P-2) before respondent No.2. He also filed an application for condonation of delay on 25.2.2016 (Annexure P-3). An application dated 29.4.2016 (Annexure P-4) was also filed by the petitioner for recounting of the votes. In pursuance to the application, Annexure P-4, respondent No.9 made a statement dated 6.5.2016 that he had no objection for recounting of the votes and vide order dated 6.5.2016 (Annexure P-7), the case was adjourned to 11.5.2016 for consideration of the application for recounting of votes. Respondent No.9 was declared elected vide result dated 10.1.2016 (Annexure P-8). Respondent No.10 vide impugned order dated 20.5.2016 (Annexure P-1) dismissed the election petition being barred by limitation. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the election petition was maintainable as the same was filed within a period of 30 days from the date of knowledge of the petitioner. It was further submitted that respondent No.10 had wrongly dismissed the election petition being barred by limitation.