IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4844 of 2008 **** Manoj Bind @ Manoj Kumar Bind, Son of Janak Lal Bind, Resident of village-Govindpur, Police Station-Dhaarahra, District Munger. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The State Election Commissioner, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Director, Panchayati Raj, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Secretary, State Election Commission, Bihar, Patna. …. …. Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Junior 1,2,4 & 5 Counsel to Additional Advocate General-II For the Respondent Nos. 3 &6: Mr. R.S.Pradhan, Senior Advocate Mr. Rajeev Lochan, Advocate ---------------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --------- Dated, the 29th September, 2008. We heard the counsel for the petitioner. 2. While challenging the constitutional validity of Section 136(g) of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, the counsel for the petitioner submits that it is contrary to Section 8(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. He would also submit that the provision is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as in - 2 - other States no such disqualification is provided. 3. We are afraid, the contentions are wholly misconceived. The constitutional validity of Section 136(g) of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act cannot be tested by comparing it with the provisions of Representation of People Act, 1951 nor with any enactment of other State. 4. The constitutionality of a State legislature cannot be tested by comparing it with the Acts of Parliament and the Acts of other State. It is not the case of the petitioner that the subject does not pertain to the State list and that Bihar Legislature was not the competent to enact the provision like Section 136(g). As a matter of fact it is in conformity with Article 243F of the Constitution of India. Article 243F of the Constitution of India reads thus: - “243F. Disqualifications for membership.- (1) A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of a Panchayat- (a) if he is so disqualified by or under any law for the time being in force for the purpose of elections to the Legislature of the State concerned: Provided that no person shall be disqualified on the ground that be is less than twenty-five years of age, if he has attained the age of twenty-one years; (b) if he is so disqualified by or under any law made by the Legislature of the State. (2) If any question arises as to whether a member of a Panchayat has become subject to any of the disqualifications mentioned in clause (1), the question shall be referred for the decision of such authority and in such manner as the Legislature of a State may, by law, provide.” - 3 - 5. Being in conformity with the provisions of Article 243F and not in violation of any other provision of Constitution, the challenge to Section 136(g) of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 is wholly misconceived. 6. Writ petition is devoid of any substance. It is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-