GHISARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that the automatic disqualification of the petitioner to contest and get nominated as Member of Panchayati Raj Institution incurred due to birth of third child on failure of vasectomy, be declared null and void and the petitioner may be declared qualified for contesting the elections of Panchayati Raj Institution 2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner went through vasectomy with an intention to take an active part in family planning policy but due to failure thereof, the petitioner has fathered third child and therefore, he cannot be penalised for no fault on his part. Learned counsel submitted that automatic disqualification of the petitioner is seriously affecting his right to contest the election which is violative of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India. On being asked by the Court as to whether the petitioner intends to question the vires of Section 19(1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short "the Act"), learned counsel answered that the petitioner is not challenging the vires of the provisions but then, the provisions needs to be interpreted in terms that on account of the birth of third child after the cut off date, the disqualification shall not be automatic. In this regard, learned counsel has relied upon a decision of this Court in the matter of Dr. Poonam Parakh & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., : WLC 2011 (3), 727.

(2.) I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the petitioner was having two children before the cut off date and the third child is born on 9.10.07 and therefore, the petitioner stands disqualified to contest the election of any Panchayati Raj Institution in terms of Section 19(1) of the Act.