LACHHO DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter relates to election of Mayor of the Gaya Municipal Corporation. Ward no. 3 was reserved for scheduled castes. The appellant contested the election of Ward Councillor as a member of scheduled castes from ward no. 3 on the basis of certificate issued by the Block Development Officer, Gaya town. She was declared elected. Co -incidently, the post of Mayor of the Gaya Municipal Corporation was reserved for a lady from scheduled castes. The appellant was intending to contest the election of Mayor. A complaint was filed that the appellant did not belong to scheduled castes and she contested the election of Ward Councillor on the basis of false caste certificate. The District Magistrate enquired into the matter and found the complaint made against the appellant true. It was found that the appellant was the daughter of Mahesh Ram who was kahar by caste i.e. a caste of Most Backward Class. She was married to one Birendra Prasad, Kahar by caste. Subsequently, she claimed to have married Sukar Paswan a member of scheduled castes. The caste certificate produced by the appellant purported to have been issued under memo no. 7839 dated 27.12.2001 by the Block Development Officer, Gaya town, on verification, was found to be fake certificate and it was not issued by the Block Development Officer. The said memo was issued to one Arvind Kumar. The subsequent caste certificate issued under memo no. 844. dated 14.2.2002 was also false and steps were taken for its cancellation.

(2.) THE District Magistrate reported the matter to the Election Commission. The Election Commission vide letter dated 2.9.2002 advised and directed the District Magistrate to take steps for not only cancellation of caste certificate issued to the appellant but also for initiating disciplinary proceeding against the person responsible for giving her a false certificate. Further direction was given that the appellant not being a scheduled caste could not hold office of Mayor reserved for the lady of scheduled castes and she could not be allowed to take part in election of Mayor and the District Magistrate was directed also to take appropriate steps in accordance with law for nullifying her election as Ward Councillor from ward no. 3 of the Gaya Municipal Corporation. The appellant being aggrieved by letter dated 2.9.2002 filed writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No. 10139/2002 which was dismissed by the impugned order on 10.10.2002. The said order had been challenged in this Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) ON consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also after going through the original record produced by the respondents it is evident that she contested the election from ward no. 3 which was reserved for scheduled castes on the basis of caste certificate purported to have been issued by the Block Development Officer under memo no. 7839 dated 27.12.2001 but on enquiry it was found that no such certificate was issued from the office of the Block Development officer. The subsequent certificate issued under memo no. 844 dated 14.2.2002 was aIso false and steps were taken for its ancellation. Not only this, during enquiry he appellant gave in writing, which is available on the record, that she was not knowing the name of her father but she was brought up by Mahesh Ram who was Kahar by caste. The said petition was shown to the learned counsel for the appellant who accepted that signature over the petition appeared to be of the appellant. Therefore, it becomes crystal clear that the appellant was given an opportunity during enquiry to produce her defence. More -over, nothing was brought on the record to show that she divorced her husband who was Kahar by caste, a member of the most Backward class and then she was married to a person of the scheduled castes. The learned single Judge has considered all these aspects and as such on consideration we do not find any merit in this appeal.