ANJU Vs. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION PEHOWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the election of a Sarpanch could be challenged through an election petition on a ground other than those specified in Section 176(4) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is the short question that arises for determination in these two writ petitions which were ordered to be heard together. When Civil Writ Petition No. 7300 of 1996 came up before the Motion Bench on 24-7-1996, it was admitted to be heard by a Full Bench presumably because the correctness of some of the observations made by a Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Guddi Devi v. State Election Commissioner, Haryana, 1995 Punj LJ 285 : (AIR 1995 Punj and Har 101) on which reliance was placed by the trial Judge in setting aside the election of the petitioner were doubted. This is how the two petitions have been placed before us for disposal. Arguments were addressed by counsel in both the cases but for the sake of convenience facts are being taken from Civil Writ Petition No. 15310 of 1996.

(2.) Petitioner is a resident of village Sarsa Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra in the State of Haryana which has been declared a Sabha area and for which a Gram Panchayat by the name of Gram Panchayat, Sarsa has been established. Elections to this Gram Panchayat were held on 15-12-1994 and the office of Sarpanch was reserved for a woman. Petitioner along with respondents 3 to 5 contested the election of Sarpanch and the petitioner was declared successful as she obtained more votes than the other candidates. Respondent 6 also filed her nomination paper but that was rejected on the ground that her name did not figure in the voters' list. Puran Chand respondent who was qualified to vote at the election filed an election petition before the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pehowa challenging the election of the petitioner on the following three grounds :-

(3.) The election petition was contested by the petitioner who controverted all the allegations made therein. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial Judge framed the following issues :-(1) Whether election of Anju respondent-1 is liable to be set aside on the grounds mentioned in the petition? OPP(2) Whether the petition is not maintainable in the present form? OPR(3) Whether petitioner has no cause of action and locus standi to file the present petition? OPR(4) Whether the respondent is entitled to special costs under Section 35-A CPC? OPR(5) Relief.