(1.) Heard Mr. P. K. Shahi, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Amit Shrivastava, learned counsel for the State Election Commission and Mr. Patanjali Rishi, learned A.C. to A.A.G. 6 for the State.
(2.) The writ petitioner has moved the Court for quashing of order dated 19.09.2006, passed by the respondent no. 7 in Case No. 10 of 2016, by which the petitioner has been declared to be disqualified from the post of Mukhiya of Panchayat Raj, Chakwa Bharwari, Block-Baheri, District-Darbhanga and the seat has been held to be vacant with a direction that the same be filled up in accordance with law.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though her date of birth recorded in the Matriculation certificate is 15.01.1996, but the same is an error for which steps have been taken for correction. He submitted that the Nagar Panchayat, Bakhtiyarpur had issued a birth certificate in which the date was recorded as 05.01.1993 and in the Aadhar Card also, the date of birth recorded is 05.01.1993. Similarly, he submitted that in the transfer certificate issued by the school, the date of birth is recorded as 05.01.1993. Learned counsel submitted that once there was a dispute with regard to the date of birth and there were documents to show that she was born in Jan., 1993, the respondent no. 7 ought not to have interfered in the matter as recording of the date of birth in the matriculation certificate is a rebuttable fact and is not a conclusive proof of the date. He further submitted that even the power to go into the question of disqualification based on the date of birth is beyond the jurisdiction of the respondent no. 7, as such dispute can only be adjudicated in an election petition as the petitioner having been elected and given certificate has also assumed office of the post of Mukhiya. Learned counsel submitted that the respondent no. 7 has not considered the documents produced on behalf of the petitioner while passing the impugned order and, thus, the same cannot be sustained. Learned counsel further submitted that if in future, it is held that the entry of the date of birth in the Matriculation certificate is erroneous, the petitioner would have suffered irreparable loss as she cannot turn the clock back and, thus, would have lost the period even though being eligible for being elected as a Mukhiya.