DROPADI Vs. CIVIL JUDGE SR DIV GANGAPUR CITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case was finally heard with the consent of the parties as the only point involved is a legal point as to whether the period for obtaining certified copy of the declaration of the election result could be excluded from the period of limitation prescribed under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (in short 'the Act'), for the purpose of filing election petition.

(2.) The respondent No. 4 filed an election petition challenging the election of the petitioner. This was filed one day beyond the period of thirty days prescribed under the Act. It was contended by the election petitioner that she had filed the election petition within thirty days from the date of obtaining copy of the declaration of the election result. The point raised was as to whether the period sent in obtaining copy of the declaration of the election result could be excluded under Section 12 of the Limitation Act. Learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) before whom the election petition is pending, heard the parties and held that the election petition was not time barred as it was filed within one month of obtaining copy of the result of the declaration. Actually, it has been held by the learned civil Judge that election petition had been filed within time and at the same time, he has held that the period spent in obtaining copy of the declaration of result of election deserved to be condoned. The petitioner challenges the action of entertaining the election petition by the learned civil Judge on the ground that it was a time barred petition and could not have been entertained. The contention of the petitioner is that Section 12 of the Limitation Act has no application to the case. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, supports the impugned order.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel and perused the record. Section 43 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 provides for the determination of dispute as to elections and reads as under :