SHAKEEL Vs. MEHBOOB KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present writ petition the petitioner (original respondent No.1 in Election Petition) has challenged order dtd. 28/9/2016 passed in Election Petition No.18 of 2016 by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hathin (Election Tribunal) by which the present petitioner was declared to be disqualified on the date of his election and further declaring respondent No.1-Mehboob Khan (original petitioner in Election Petition) as elected for the post of Panch of Ward No.6 of Gram Panchayat Ali Meo.

(2.) The present petitioner-Shakeel son of Rashid contested the election for the post of Panch of Ward No.6 of Gram Panchayat Ali Meo, held on 17/1/2016, the result of which was declared on 17/1/2016. According to respondent No.1-Mehboob Khan-the original petitioner in election petition, the present petitioner who was declared elected, was 20 years and 6 months of age i.e. below 21 years when Sec. 173(2) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, for short) provides for the minimum age of 21 years on the date of election and therefore he was disqualified from contesting the election itself. There was a further prayer that after declaring the present petitioner as disqualified, respondent No.1 should be declared elected in his place. The petitioner-Shakeel filed written statement opposing the election petition and submitted that he had completed the age of 21 years and was rightly declared elected. On the basis of the pleadings and documents the Election Tribunal framed 6 issues and also admitted oral as well as documentary evidence before it. The Tribunal held that the present petitioner, the elected candidate, was not of 21 years of age on the date of election and therefore was disqualified. The trial Court went ahead and granted the further relief of declaring respondent No.1- Mehboob Khan @ Jakir as elected in place of the petitioner for the post of Panch from Ward No.6 Gram Panchayat Village Ali Meo. Hence this petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the petitioner is aggrieved by the second part of the relief granted by the Election Tribunal namely the declaring of respondent No.1-Mehboob Khan @ Jakir elected in his place rather than following the mandate of law to direct holding of fresh elections. To repeat, the counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that it was difficult for him to assail the finding regarding the age of the petitioner as 20 years 6 months. He, however, submitted that in terms of the provision under Sec. 176(4)(a)(ii), (iii) of the Act, the second relief granted by the trial Court is illegal and contrary to the provision of Sec. 176 of the Act. He, therefore, prayed for partly allowing the petition and removal of the second relief granted.