JAIND RAM Vs. LEKH RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 20.11.2009 of learned A.C.S.-cum-Financial Commissioner (Revenue) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh in Appeal No. 1 of 2009 (1 of 2008).

(2.) Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition based on the pleadings of the parties, are that respondent No.1 Lekh Ram filed election petition under section 163 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 before the Deputy Commissioner, Mandi to set aside the election of petitioner to the office of Member of Zila Parishad from Bhambla Ward No.28 declared on 24.12.2005. Respondent No.1 submitted in his election petition that petitioner was Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. disqualified to be elected on the date of his election for the office of Member, Zila Parishad, as per section 122 (1) (c) of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act' for brevity sake) and Amended Act No. 17 of 2005. According to respondent No.1, Smt. Brikami Devi, wife of the petitioner, had encroached upon the Government land bearing Khasra No. 1,2,3,5,35,818 and 857 kita 7 measuring 0-25-5 hectares situated in Mauja Dhatoli/489, Sub Tehsil Baldwara, District Mandi. She had applied for the regularization of the land to the concerned Revenue Authority on 13.8.2002. According to respondent No.1, petitioner was disqualified to be elected as Member of the office of Zila Parishad. Respondent No.1 had also filed the petition on the ground that counting of votes for Bhambla Ward No.28 of Zila Parishad has not been done as per provisions of the Act and Rules framed thereunder.

(3.) Learned Deputy Commissioner framed the issues and returned findings that the wife of the petitioner had encroached upon the Government land and he had concealed this material information while filing nomination paper to the office of Zila Parishad from Ward No. 28. He declared the petitioner disqualified to contest the election of the Member of Zila Parishad under section 122 (1) (c) of the Act and hence in these circumstances, the election of petitioner was set aside. Learned Deputy Commissioner has decided the issue against respondent No.1 as far as counting of votes etc. was concerned. Petitioner preferred an appeal before the ACS-cum-Financial Commissioner (Revenue) by way of appeal No. 1 of 2009. The same was rejected by the Appellate Authority on 20.11.2009. Hence, this petition.