SMT. SUNITA DEVI WIFE OF OMPRAKASH Vs. ANITA DEVI WIFE OF SHRI VIKRAM (WRONGLY MENTIONED AS VIKRAY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A - Heard the counsel for the petitioner-returned candidate (for short 'RC') and the respondent - election petitioner (for short 'EP') and perused the impugned judgment dated 9.6.2017 passed by the District Judge, Jhunjhunu allowing the EP's election petition filed under Section 43 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short, 'the Act of 1994') read with Rule 80 of the Rajasthan Panchayat (Election) Rules, 1994 (for short, 'the Rules of 1994') Counsel for the RC fairly admits that at the time of filing nomination form for elections to the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Khandwa, Panchayat Samiti, Buhana, District Jhunjhunu, the RC had submitted a certificate of Class-X from the National Institute of Open Schooling, New Delhi. He submits that the said certificate not being authenticated by the institute, it rightly was not taken by the trial court as reflective of the RC's minimum educational qualification as required under Section 19 (t) of the Act of 1994.

(2.) Mr. R.P. Singh, however, emphatically submitted that the RC had also passed Class-VIII from Vidhyashram Sr. Secondary Public School, Khetri, District Jhunjhunu. It was submitted that the RC thus had the requisite prescribed minimum educational qualification to contest election to the post of Sarpanch. The RC's qualification of Class-VIII pass, according to Mr. R.P. Singh, also came to be admitted by the EP in the course of her cross-examination. It was submitted that in this view of the matter, the RC had the requisite minimum educational qualification and her election to the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Khandwa, Panchayat Samiti, Buhana, District Jhunjhunu could not have been setaside, as has been illegally done by the impugned judgment dated 9.6.2017 as it is vitiated by perversity. It was prayed that the judgment dated 9.6.2017 passed by the trial court be therefore set-aside.

(3.) Mr. Bharat Saini, counsel appearing for the EP submitted that for one : any document relating to the educational qualification not submitted before the Returning Officer at the time of filling up the nomination form cannot be relied upon as defence in an election petition filed against the RC were it so, the scrutiny of nomination form by the returning officer would cease to be of all relevance. Counsel submitted that even otherwise, the marks sheet of Class-VIII purportedly issued by Vidhyashram Sr. Secondary Public School, Khetri, District Jhunjhunu relied upon by the RC was a duplicate issued in September, 2015, when in-fact the election to the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Khandwa was held in January, 2015. Mr. Bharat Saini submitted that this factum by itself is reflective of RC's Class-VIII marks sheet having been subsequently fraudulently procured to find a defence to the election petition. Counsel drew the attention of this Court to the statement of RC in the course of her cross-examination before the trial court, where she stated that- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...