LAWS(P&H)-1966-10-30

BISHAN SINGH Vs. AMBA DATT AND OTHERS

Decided On October 07, 1966
BISHAN SINGH Appellant
V/S
AMBA DATT AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bishan Singh, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Deon (Saproon) Tehsil Kandaghat in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed that the election of respondents Nos. 1 to 16 to the Panchayat Samiti, Dharampur Block be set aside and they be removed from their offices as members of the said Panchayat and further that respondent No. 1 should also be removed from the office of the Panch of Gram Panchayat, Dangri. A few relevant facts may be noticed here. Amba Datt respondent No. 1 was in the employment of Government of India as Sub Post-master; Saproon, Tehsil Kandaghat. He was elected as Panch of Gram Panchayat, Dangri, on 2nd January, 1964. Subsequently 37 persons including Amba Datt, respondent No. 1 filed nomination papers for the election to the Panchayati Samiti Dharampur Block . In the list of voters which was prepared under Rule 3 of the Panchayat Samiti (Primary Members) Election Rules 1961, the name of Amba Dutt, respondent No. 1 was also included. The petitioner raised objection under Rule 9 of the said Rules against the nomination of Amba Dutt as a candidate for election to the Panchayat Samiti, Dharampur Block on the ground that he was in the employment of the Government of India as Sub-Postmaster, Saproon. The Tehsildar who was the Returning Officer orally overruled the objection and accepted the nomination of respondent No. 1 on 15th January, 1965. Respondents Nos. 1 to 16 succeeded in the election on 2nd January, 1965, as a result of voting. There were 228 voters and each of them could cast only one vote. 225 voters out of them cast the votes and Amba Dutt got 9 votes. The petitioner alleged that Amba Dutt being in the employment of the Government of India as Sub-Postmaster, Saproon, could neither be elected as Panch of Gram Panchayat, Dangri nor as a member of the Panchayat Samiti, Dharampur Block .

(2.) Respondent No. 1 in his written-statement maintained that he was eligible to stand as primary member of the Dharampur Block under Section 6(d) of the Punjab Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1961. It was also pleaded by him that he was not in employment of the Government of India as Sub-Postmaster but he was only an extra departmental Sub-Postmaster on the part time basis for which Rs. 73/- per mensem were paid to him. He further explained that he was eligible under the law to be a Panch of Gram Panchayat, Dangri, and he was duly elected to that office and that his election was neither challenged by any person nor could it successfully be challenged. Respondents Nos. 2 to 17 did not file any written-statements. The Collector, Simla district, respondent No. 18 stated that part time Government servants were allowed to contest Panchayat Samiti elections vide Punjab Government Ordinance dated the 1th November, 1964, promulgated by the Governor of Punjab. According to him under Section 6(5)(g) of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1960 a whole time salaried Government servant could not contest elections to the Gram Panchayat and as respondent No. 1 was a part time salaried Government servant he could be elected as a Panch.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that according to the amended Section 6(b) of the Punjab Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1961 only whole time salaried servant from contesting the election to the membership of the Panchayat Samiti. He, however, urged that according to Section 6(5)(a), respondent No. 1 was not qualified to be elected as Panch of the Gram Panchayat, Dangri. Section 6(5)(a) of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act runs -