IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 8693/2008 29.8.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Dr. Swati Bhati } Shri Pradeep Kalwania }, for the petitioner. Shri Manish Sharma, for the respondent. In the writ petition the petitioner who is the elected Sarpanch has challenged the decision dated 21.8.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) before whom an election petition challenging the election of the petitioner as Sarpanch was filed. The principal grevience of the petitioner is with regard to the findings of issue No.1 wherein the election has been set aside on account of the ineligibility of the petitioner on account of the disqualification Section 19 (gg) of the Act of 1994. Section 19 (i) reads as follows : “19(1) Qualifications for election as a Panch or a member.- Every person registered as a voter in the list of voters of a Panchayati Raj Institution shall be qualified for election as a Panch or, as the case may be,Member of such Panchayat Raj Institution unless such person- (a) to (g) xxx xxx xxx (gg) is under trial in the contempt court which has taken cognizance of the offence and framed the charges against him of any offence punishable with imprisonment for five years or more,” It is not disputed that the petitioner is facing trial before the court for the offences under Section 147, 148, 332, 357, 382 IPC and Sections 135 and 136 of the Representation of People Act. The learned trial court has found that so far as the offence under Section 382 IPC is concerned the same is punishable with an imprisonment of more than 5 years. In view of the aforesaid disqualification is mentioned as is attracted to the case of the petitioner. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner in his nomination form Annexure-2 had disclosed the fact regarding pendency of the criminal case and had not concealed anything from the Returning Officer at the time of filing the nomination form and the form having been accepted his election could not be set aside in the election petition. So far as the above contention of the petitioner is concerned Rule 80 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (election) Rules 1994 expressly provides that an election may be called in question by presenting an election petition before the court on the grounds specified and one of the ground is that the returned candidate was disqualified for being elected. In view of the fact that the disqualification as provided in Section 19 (gg) was applicable in the case of the petitioner the election of the petitioner could only have been challenged by means of the election petition and no exception can be taken on the basis of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the fact has been disclosed in the nomination form submitted by the petitioner and the same had been accepted. Even otherwise the wrongful acceptance of the nomination form is also the ground for setting aside an election. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that the direction given by the learned Judge while accepting the election petition that the petitioner who is the Sarpanch should hand over the charge to the Up-Sarpanch who belongs to the OBC category is bad in law and in view of the provisions of Section 25 the court could not have directed that the charge handover to the Up-Sarpanch on account of that the fact that the Up Sarpanch was not a person of the general category but of the reserved caste (O.B.C.). I have given my thoughtful consideration and submission perused the provisions of Section 25 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act 1994. Second proviso to Sub Section (1) of Section 25 of the Act reads as follows : “(Provided that charge of office of any Chairperson who was elected to an office reserved for the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes or the Backward Classes or for Workmen, shall be handed over as per directions of the Competent Authority, to a member, if any, of the said Castes, Tribes or Classes or a Workman member as the case may be, in the manner as may be prescribed and where there is no such member belonging to said Castes, Tribes, Classes or a Workman member to whom charge can be given as aforesaid, the charge shall be handed over in the manner as may be prescribed, to any member not belonging to the aforesaid categories.)” A perusal of the above provision goes to show that the provision is applicable in the case of the seat of the Sarpanch being reserved for the person either ST/SC or OBC in which event a candidate of the general caste not being from the reserved category of ST/SC/OBC would not be entitled to hold such a post and conversely. In the facts and circumstances, therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed summarily. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS