DEVI LAL DHOLI Vs. MOOLCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MATTER comes up on an application of the respondent under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacationing of ad -interim stay order. With the consent of the rival parties, the matter is heard finally and disposed of finally at this stage. The petitioner has laid this writ petition by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court to assail the impugned judgment dt. 22nd January, 2013 passed by the District Judge, Chittorgarh (Election Tribunal).

(2.) THE facts, in brevity, giving rise to this petition are that the first respondent filed an Election Petition under Sec. 43 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 read with Rule 80 of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 before the learned Tribunal challenging the election of the present petitioner as Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Samariya, District Chittorgarh. Challenge to the election of the petitioner, Devi Lal Dholi, as Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Samariya was precisely on two grounds, namely, that he has contested the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat which was reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate by impersonating himself as a member of Scheduled Caste. The other ground of challenge was that on the crucial date of the acceptance of nomination form, the incumbent was having four children and the third and fourth child were born after promulgation of the Act of 1994, and therefore, he has incurred disqualification within the four corners of Section 19(1) of the Act of 1994 to contest the election. The petitioner, who was arrayed as non -petitioner in the said election petition, contested the election petition and submitted his reply denying all the allegations. In his return, the petitioner has specifically pleaded that he belongs to Dholi Caste and the said caste has been declared as Scheduled Caste by the State in the list published by it, and therefore, the allegation of impersonation is absolutely false. Joining issue with the respondent/election petitioner, the petitioner has refuted the allegation that at the time of contesting election he had more than two alive children. The respondent has specifically pleaded that all these allegations are vague and cryptic and no material particulars have been furnished to substantiate these allegations. On behalf of the other respondents also, separate written statement was filed.

(3.) AFTER settling the issues, the learned Election Tribunal recorded evidence of the contesting parties. On conclusion of evidence final arguments were heard by the learned Election Tribunal and on appreciation of oral evidence and materials on record, the learned Tribunal vide impugned judgment declared the election of the petitioner as void ab -initio by recording a definite finding that the petitioner is not belonging to the Scheduled Caste, and therefore, he has impersonated while contesting the election of Sarpanch. While considering the other ground of challenge to the election of the petitioner as Sarpanch raised by the respondent -election petitioner, the learned Tribunal has over -ruled the same. In the final verdict besides declaring the election of the petitioner void ab -initio, the learned Tribunal has also issued a direction, whereby the respondent -election petitioner was declared as elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat.