KAVITA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Kalal Majri, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala in the year 2015. One Raj Kumar S/o Kushvir made a complaint against her on 28.11.2016 that the educational qualification certificate submitted by the petitioner at the time of her election was not genuine. The Deputy Commissioner, Ambala, vide his letter dated 09.12.2016, asked the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Shehjadpur, for his comments on the complaint. The Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Shehjadpur wrote a letter dated 16.12.2016 to the District School Inspector, Saharanpur regarding genuineness of educational qualification certificate (8th class) of the petitioner. On 17.12.2016, the District School Inspector, Saharanpur informed the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Shehjadpur that there were several cuttings found in the record of the petitioner and hence, the transfer certificate issued to the petitioner was fake. On the basis of the report of the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Shehjadpur, the Deputy Commissioner, Ambala, issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 03.12.2016 as to why she should not be put under suspension in terms of Section 51 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for not possessing the mandatory qualification of having passed 8th class being a woman candidate. The petitioner submitted her reply on 10.01.2017 and denied the allegations but vide order dated 24.03.2017, the Deputy Commissioner put the petitioner under suspension observing that the orders of the regular inquiry have been given separately restricting the petitioner from participating in any proceedings or meeting of the Panchayat and hand over movable-immovable property or record etc. of the Gram Panchayat to the majority Panch.

(2.) Aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner filed the statutory appeal under Section 51(5) of the Act before the Appellate Authority. Her appeal, however, was dismissed on 30.06.2017. It was observed that the proviso to Section 175(v) of the Act says that in case of a women candidate or a candidate belonging to a scheduled caste, the minimum qualification is 8th class pass and the certificate attached by the petitioner of her education has not been found to be genuine.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the proceedings under Section 51 of the Act could not have been initiated in view of Article 243-O of the Constitution of India as according to him, the disqualification of the petitioner being not a 8th class pass goes to the root of the matter, for which the only remedy was to file the election petition. In this regard, he has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh and others v. Surinder Singh Banolta, 2007(1) R.C.R. (Civil) 254.