Paramjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. M.L. Saggar, Senior Advocate, with Mr. G.S. Brar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. T.P. Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Mr. Ghulam Nabi Malik, Advocate, for respondent No.5. Mr. Roshan Lal Batta, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Mandeep K. Sajjan, Advocate, for respondents No.6 to 10. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioners, who are 6 out of 11 Panches of Gram Panchayat, Village Lakha, Tehsil Jagraon, District Ludhiana, have filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the proceedings of the meeting held on 22.7.2008, in which respondent No.6 CWP No. 13507 of 2008 -2- was elected as Sarpanch of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat. It is the case of the petitioners that though in spite of the order dated 22.7.2008 passed by this Court in CWP No. 12625 of 2008, which was duly communicated to the Presiding Officer on mobile phone, they were not permitted to attend the proceedings of the said meeting and the remaining 5 Panches, who were present in the meeting, have elected respondent No.6 as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. This fact has been controverted by the respondents in their written statements. It is the case of the respondents that actually, at the time of the meeting held on 22.7.2008, the petitioners were present in this Court and they did not attend the meeting. The respondents have also raised preliminary objection that in view of the decision of this Court in Baljit Singh v. State of Punjab and others (CWP No. 13643 of 2008, decided on August 22, 2008), the petitioners have the remedy of election petition to challenge the election of respondent No.6. In view of the aforesaid facts, after arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioners states that keeping in view the disputed questions of facts involved in this writ petition and in view of decision of this Court in Baljit Singh's case (supra), the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail the remedy of election petition. However, counsel for the petitioners further submits that since immediately after the election of the office of Sarpanch on 22.7.2008, the petitioners had filed this petition on 29.7.2008 i.e. within the limitation prescribed for filing election CWP No. 13507 of 2008 -3- petition, therefore, in view of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Danda Rajeshwari v. Bodavula Hanumayamma and others, (1996) 6 SCC 199, they may be permitted to file election petition within three weeks from today and in case election petition is filed within three weeks, the same may be directed to be heard on merits by the Election Tribunal. Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection, if the aforesaid prayer of learned counsel for the petitioners is accepted. In view of above, we permit the petitioners to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file an election petition under Section 76 read with Section 89 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 within a period of three weeks from today, challenging the election of respondent No.6. Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. If the election petition is filed by the petitioners within a period of three weeks from today, the Election Tribunal is directed to entertain and decide the same on merits, expeditiously. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE November 20, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE