BAIDYANATH THAKUR Vs. SACHIDANAND PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the petitioner Baidyanath Thakur has obtained a rule from the High Court calling upon the respondents to show cause why the order of the Additional District Magistrate of Saharsa, dated the 14th November, 1960, should not be set aside by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution,

(2.) Cause has been shown by the respondents to whom notice of the rule was ordered to be given.

(3.) It appears that the petitioner was elected as a Mukhiya of Bihar Gram Panchayat in the district of Saharsa by an election which was conducted on the 3rd and 4th of August, 1960. Respondent No. 1 filed an election petition under Rule 72 of the Gram Panchayat Election Rules and the election petition was allowed by the Additional District Magistrate of Saharsa on the ground that nomination paper of respondent No. 1 was improperly rejected by the Elections Officer under Rule 23(2) (1) of the Gram Panchayat Election Rules because his age was below 25 years.