IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 1580 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION : 25.09.2008 Dharampal .... PETITIONER Versus Amrik and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Garg Narwana, Advocate, for respondent No.1. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The petitioner, a defeated candidate, has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 7.12.2006 (Annexure P-3), passed by the Election Tribunal (respondent No.2 herein), whereby the election petition, filed by the petitioner challenging the election of respondent No.1 as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Village Teek, Tehsil and District Kaithal, has been dismissed. The petitioner had challenged the election of respondent No.1 on the ground that he had adopted corrupt practice for securing his success, by distributing liquor and paying money to the voters. It was also alleged CWP No. 1580 of 2007 -2- that respondent No.1 got the votes of the dead persons polled in his favour. Secondly, he questioned the election of respondent No.1 on the ground that he does not belong to the Scheduled Caste category and his election to the office of Sarpanch, which was reserved for Scheduled Caste category, is illegal. In this regard, it was alleged that respondent No.1 belongs to `Badi' caste, which in Haryana is a Backward Class and not a Scheduled Caste. In this regard, the stand of respondent No.1 is that he belongs to `Bajigar' caste, which is a Scheduled Caste. He further states that even `Badi' caste is a Scheduled Caste in Haryana. In paras No.20, 21 and 22 of the impugned order, the Election Tribunal, after taking into consideration the documentary as well as the oral evidence led by the parties, has held that the petitioner has failed to prove that in the election for the office of Sarpanch, respondent No.1 had committed any corrupt practice for securing his success. It has been held that the petitioner did not lead any cogent evidence to prove that any voter was influenced by respondent No.1 by distributing the liquor or by payment of money. Regarding the allegation of the petitioner that respondent No.1 does not belong to the Scheduled Caste category, it has been held that in the Gazette Notification Ex.PW6/A, issued by the Government of India by making amendment in the Scheduled appended to the Constitution, which contains the list of Scheduled Caste for the State of Haryana, it has been specifically mentioned at Serial No. 25 that `Badi' caste within the State of Haryana is Scheduled Caste. In view of the said documentary evidence, it CWP No. 1580 of 2007 -3- has been held by the Election Tribunal that `Badi' caste is Scheduled Caste and not Backward Class, as claimed by the petitioner in terms of the letters Ex.P4 and Ex.P5, issued by the officials of the Haryana Government. The Tribunal, while relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, AIR 2005 Supreme court 162, has observed that the Government of India is competent to amend the Constitution regarding the list of Scheduled Caste and in view of the Gazette Notification Ex.PW6/A, `Badi' caste is to be taken as Scheduled Caste is the State of Haryana. In view of these findings, the election petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has clearly proved that respondent No.1 had served liquor and paid money to the voters to influence them to caste their votes in his favour, but in spite of the sufficient material and evidence on record, a wrong finding of fact has been recorded by the Election Tribunal. We do not find any force in the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence led by the petitioner and respondent No.1, has recorded a pure finding of fact to the effect that the petitioner has failed to prove the alleged corrupt practice. The learned counsel could not refer to any evidence which has not been considered by the Tribunal. It is well settled that the standard of proof of the corrupt practice is very heavy and the election petitioner is required to prove the alleged corrupt practice beyond reasonable doubt. Since the petitioner CWP No. 1580 of 2007 -4- has failed to discharge the burden to prove the alleged corrupt practice and a finding of fact has been recorded against him, therefore, we are not inclined to interfere in the said finding of fact. Regarding the second issue as to whether `Badi' caste is Scheduled Caste or Backward Class, in our opinion, the Election Tribunal has rightly held the same as Scheduled Caste, while relying the Gazette Notification issued by the Government of India, which as per the judgment of the Supreme Court in E.V. Chinnaiah's case (supra) will prevail over any letter issued by the Haryana Government. However, the case of respondent No.1 is that he belongs to `Bajigar' caste. Even otherwise, in paras No. 33 to 42 of the impugned order, the Election Tribunal has also recorded a finding that respondent No.1 belongs to `Bajigar' caste, which even as per the Haryana Government notification is a Scheduled Caste. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to successfully assail the said finding of fact. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order, dismissing the election petition of the petitioner. Dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE September 25, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) ndj JUDGE