KAVITA Vs. KAILASHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 6-9-2011, passed by the District Judge Dholpur in election petition No.61/2010, whereby the election of the petitioner Kavita, defendant before the trial court (herein after 'the defendant'), has been set aside under the provisions of Section 19(a) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (herein after the Rs.1994 Act') holding that from the evidence on record it was established that the defendant at the time of contesting election for the post of Member of Panchayat Samiti for Ward No.8, Basedi was not 21 years of age and thus ineligible to contest.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order dated 6-9-2011 passed by the trial court.

(3.) APART from the aforesaid, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sadhana Lodh Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [AIR 2003 SC 1561] has held that the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is very limited and ought to be only to see whether an inferior Court or Tribunal has acted within its jurisdiction and has not committed perversity or misdirected itself in law. In the context aforesaid, I am of the view that there is nothing amiss with factually and/ or legally in the impugned order dated 6-9-2011 passed by the trial Court District Judge Dholpur warranting any interference at the hands of this court. The findings arrived at by the trial court in the context of facts of the case and law applicable thereto are neither perverse nor suffer from any misdirection in law. Therefore I find no force in the writ petition and the same is dismissed.