RITA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved against the order dated 5.9.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner vide which he has appointed respondent No. 3 as acting Sarpanch after removal of the previous incumbent, namely, Mohit Kumar.

(2.) Shorn of the unnecessary details, the elections of the Panchayat took place on 24.1.2016 in which Mohit Kumar contested for the office of Sarpanch as a scheduled caste candidate. One Saravjeet Singh made a complaint against him that he does not belong to scheduled caste but is Arora by caste. The matter was taken up to the National Commission for Scheduled Caste, and directed Deputy Commissioner, Yamunanagar, to hold an enquiry to find out as to whether Mohit Kumar belongs to scheduled caste or not. The Deputy Commissioner, after a fact finding enquiry, cancelled the certificate of scheduled caste obtained by Mohit Kumar on 25.7.2016.

(3.) Apropos, Mohit Kumar was also dis-qualified from the post of Sarpanch on 4.8.2016. He challenged the order of his disqualification, before the Financial Commissioner and filed a writ petition against the order of cancellation of his caste certificate. In the writ petition he was un-successful but his appeal bearing LPA No. 1641 of 2016 was pending. In the meantime, the Financial Commissioner allowed the revision filed by Mohit Kumar and remanded the case back to the Deputy Commissioner, by setting aside the order of his removal dated 4.8.2016/10.8.2016. The Deputy Commissioner ordered for a fresh inquiry. Thereafter Saravjeet Singh filed a writ petition No. 17977 of 2017 to challenge the order of the Financial Commissioner in which notice of motion was issued on 16.8.2017. The operation of the impugned order passed by the Financial Commissioner was stayed. Thereafter on 5.9.2017 the Deputy Commissioner, Yamunanagar passed the impugned order and held that election of respondent No. 3 as acting Sarpanch shall take place with immediate effect which lead to the filing of the present writ petition by the Panches on the ground that there is no provision for the election of acting Sarpanch as the office of acting Sarpanch as the office of acting Sarpanch is no more available after the act No. 10 of 1999 dated 5.3.1999 came into effect. It is further submitted that in the absence of Sarpanch, the reins of the Panchayat is handed over to the Panch who command the majority. In this regard he has referred to the provisions of Section 51 (6) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 which are reproduced as under:-