ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 15.5.2007 passed by learned Appellate Authority in case No.12/9 of 2006 and for affirming order dated 30.9.2006 passed by Authorized Officer- Sub Divisional Officer ( Civil), Solan in Case No.4/Eln/06.

(2.) The facts in brief as per petitioner are that respondent No.2 had filed election petition before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Solan Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment Yes and challenged the election of Pardhan, Gram Panchayat Dharampur held on 18.12.2005, in which three candidates contested the election. The respondent No.2 on 5.12.2005 had objected the nomination of the petitioner for the post of Pardhan on the grounds that the petitioner had not paid the dues which were standing in his name as per Audit Report for the years 4/95 to 3/2000 but, respondent No.3 despite objection illegally accepted the nomination papers of the petitioner. The petitioner had produced a false and fictitious NOC before respondent No.3. The respondent No.2 objected to the NOC also. The respondent No.2 filed affidavit in support of the petition which was attested by Notary Public. The respondent No.2 had prayed for setting aside the election of petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner had contested the petition by filing reply in which prayer has been made for dismissal of the election petition as the same has not been verified in accordance with law. The petition was filed in the court of Sub Divisional Magistrate and not before Prescribed Authority under the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short Act). The petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. There were three candidates namely petitioner, respondent No.2 and one Prem Chand. It has been alleged that Prem Chand, a necessary party, has not been impleaded in the petition and therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. He denied all the averments made in the election petition. The objections of respondent No.2 with respect to NOC is frivolous. The petitioner denied that any amount was due from him to Gram Panchayat.