SHIMLA RANI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS , who are seven in number, are members of Nagar Panchayat Khanauri. They, along with respondent No. 4 and five others, were elected as such on 18.9.2005.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 2 - the District Development and Panchayat Officer, issued a notice on 26.9.2005 (Annexure P-8), calling meeting of the newly elected members of Nagar Panchayat Khanauri on 30.9.2005 at 11.00 A.M., in the office of Nagar Panchayat, to administer oath to them and also to elect President and Vice-President. In the above said meeting, oath was administered, to the members, thereafter, nominations were called for the post of the President, petitioner No. 3, along with respondent No. 4 were the candidates. As per rules, in case of contest, voting is by show of hands. All the 13 members were present. It is case of the petitioners, that one Naresh Kumar abstained from voting and only five members cast their votes in favour of respondent Nos. 4 and seven in favour of petitioner No. 3. Respondent No. 2 did not record the proceedings in a fair manner, but under political pressure, declared respondent No. 4 as President of Nagar Panchayat Khanauri. On asking of respondent No. 2, the petitioners were not allowed to leave the office till he finished other formalities. Thereafter, he left the office in a huff. Respondent No. 4 openly declared that he has the entire administration in his pocket as he was being favoured by the then Chief Minister of the State of Punjab. The petitioners then rushed to this Court and filed the present writ petition on 1.10.2005, wherein they prayed for issuance of writ of prohibition, restraining respondent No. 1 from notifying election of respondent No. 4 as President of Nagar Panchayat Khanauri, in pursuance of election alleged to have been conducted on 30.9.2005, the same being illegal. It was further prayed that petitioner No. 3 be declared as elected President of Nagar Panchayat Khanauri. In the alternative, it was prayed that the directions be issued to hold election afresh, in the presence of an Observer to be appointed by this Court.

(3.) THE petitioners went to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and their appeal bearing No. 3153 of 2006 was disposed of vide order dated 25.7.2006. Relevant portion of the order reads thus :-