BALJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who are 5 out of 9 Panches of Gram Panchayat, Village Bambiha, Tehsil and District Bathinda, have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the proceedings of the meeting of the members of the Gram Panchayat held on 21.7.2008, wherein respondent No. 6 Kheta Singh was elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. The petitioners have also sought for a direction to the official respondents to convene a fresh meeting of the members of Gram Panchayat for conducting the election of the Sarpanch in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Punjab Panchayat Election Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules').

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the election of nine members of Gram Panchayat of the village was held on 26.5.2008. After the election, names of nine elected Panches were duly notified and oath of allegiance was administered to them. Thereafter, under Section 13-A of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda (respondent No. 3 herein) authorised Shri Rajinder Singh, Sub Divisional Officer (respondent No. 4 herein) as Presiding Officer to convene the first meeting of the newly elected members of the Gram Panchayat to conduct the election of the office of Sarpanch. Accordingly, respondent No. 4 convened the first meeting of the Gram Panchayat on 18.7.2008. The said meeting was attended by 5 Panches i.e. the petitioners and the remaining 4 Panches, who belong to the opposite group, remained absent. Therefore, due to lack of quorum, the said meeting was adjourned to 19.7.2008, as sub-rule (2) of Rule 45 of the Rules prescribes two-third quorum for the first meeting. However, as per sub-rule (6), no quorum is necessary for the second meeting. On 19.7.2008, due to non-availability of time to the Presiding Officer, the meeting was again adjourned to 20.7.2008. On 20.7.2008, the meeting was held at Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sangat, which was attended by all the 9 Panches, but the said meeting was again postponed to 21.7.2008 at 12 noon, on the ground that no time was left.

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioners that as a matter of fact, on 21.7.2008, the Presiding Officer did not come present at the office of the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sangat and no meeting of the members of the Gram Panchayat was held on that day, but subsequently, the Presiding Officer, in connivance with the minority group and the Panchayat Secretary, prepared the false proceedings of the meeting by showing that the said meeting was held on 21.7.2008 and it was attended by 6 Panches, in which respondent No. 6 was declared elected as Sarpanch. Therefore, the proceedings of alleged meeting held on 21.7.2008 are fabricated and fictitious, and are wholly illegal and void ab initio, therefore, the same are liable to be quashed in the writ jurisdiction.