Letters Patent Appeal No.541 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Letters Patent Appeal No.541 of 2010 Date of decision: 24.5.2011 Harcharan Singh & others ...Appellants Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Vikas Singh, Advocate for the appellants. Ms. Madhu Dayal, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. S.S.Bhinder, Advocate for respondents No.4 and 5. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, ACJ. 1. This appeal has been preferred against the order of learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition of the appellants seeking a direction for fresh election for two Panches of SC category. 2. Election to the Gram Panchayat of village Ghuda, District Bathinda was held in pursuance of notification dated 13.5.2008 under the provisions of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). On 19.5.2008 list of validly nominated candidates was circulated and two persons were shown to have been elected unopposed in the reserve category. On 24.5.2008, the election was countermanded on the ground of wrongful rejection of nomination of a candidate. Fresh election was directed to be held. However, the process of election initiated vide notification dated 6.1.2010 did not include two posts reserved for SC Letters Patent Appeal No.541 of 2010 -2- candidates which became cause of action for filing the writ petition by the appellants. 3. Case of the appellants is that once fresh election has to be held, two seats could not be left out. This stand has been opposed on the ground that there could be no question of countermanding the election for the said two seats after result thereof had been duly declared. In this situation, only remedy against the result of election may be to file an election petition under Section 76 of the Act. In support of this plea, reliance was placed on a judgment of this Court dated 23.12.2008 in CWP No.10547 of 2008 Balwinder Singh Vs. The State of Punjab and others. 4. Learned Single Judge upheld the objection of the respondents and dismissed the writ petition. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Once result of election was declared, there could be no question of countermanding of election as the election process come to an end with the declaration of the result. This being so, direction sought in the writ petition for fresh election for the posts for which result had already been declared could not be granted. No ground to interfere with the view taken by the learned Single Judge is made out. The appeal is dismissed. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Acting Chief Justice May 24, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge