LAWS(RAJ)-2009-3-36

PREM KUMAR DHANDU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Decided On March 20, 2009
Prem Kumar Dhandu Appellant
V/S
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all the above writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking direction for quashing impugned election notice dated 27.02.2009 of Chairman and, it is, further, prayed that in the alternative the impugned notice may be kept in abeyance and a mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to abide by the mandate of law and conduct the election of Ward Member of the vacant seat before the election of Chair -person.

(2.) IN all the above writ petitions, the election of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Rawatsar/Sojat/Nokha is under challenge; more specifically, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1836/2009, Prem Kumar Dhandu v. State and Ors. and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3260/2009, Hanuman Prasad v. State and Ors. the petitioners are residents of Ward No. 14 and they are challenging the election of Chairman of Municipal Board, Rawatsar which has fallen vacant due to resignation of the Chair -person Abhishek Matoria, who has become Member of the Legislative Assembly. In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1737/2009, Jai Narayan v. State and Ors. and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1781/2009, Ganpat Singh v. State and Ors. the challenge is made by the voters of Ward No. 18 of Sojat City (District Pali) where the post of Chairman has fallen vacant due to death of elected Chairman Bhanwar Lal on 11.04.2008. In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1839/2009, Prem Dhandu v. State and Ors. the petitioner being voter of Ward No. 16, Nokha is challenging election of Chairman of the Municipal Board, Nokha where the post of Chairman has fallen vacant due to the then Chairman Kanhaiya Lal Jhanwar having been elected Member to the Legislative Assembly. All these writ petitions are related with election of Chairman of Municipal Board, Rawatsar/Sojat/Nokha and, therefore, the same are being decided by this common order/judgment.

(3.) FOR the above reason, in all these writ petitions, the petitioners have raised mainly the ground that the respondents cannot conduct election of Chairman of the Municipal Board without holding first the election of Ward Member of the vacant seat, therefore, holding election of Chairman before election of Ward Member is illegal, unconstitutional and, therefore, the respondents may be restrained from doing so. For the said relief, the petitioners have raised so many grounds and learned Counsel for the petitioners have also argued the matter at length.