48 1 3 1 4 1 FeAe0eNoe4493 of 2009 l0 8 Mle IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNOAB 8 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision1 May 16 2011 1 1 r FOe NoA493 of 2009 tO S Ml 0 0 Amarjit Kaur and others I C5 I Versus Z Deputy Commissioner exercising the powers of Presiding Officer Election Tribunal Amritsar and others 2 CORAM HONBLE MRJSTICE MOHINDER PAL Z m 1 Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment2 2 To be referred to the Reportersor not7 Z 3e Whether the judgmentshould be reportedin the Digest2 Llm Presentl MrGurinder S Lal Advocate for the appellants None for the respondents MOHINDER PAL Oe This appeal IS directed against the order dated 2172009 passed by the DeputyCommissioner exercising the powers of Presiding Officer EIection Tribunal Amritsar short Rashmi 2013.04.20 01: 07 True Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 49 IJ 1 2 FO NoA493 of 2009 lO 8 Ml the Election Tribunal whereby Election Petition filed by the appelIants chaIlenging the EIection of Rupinderjit Ka u r respondent No2J as Sarpanch of Gram PanchayatChappaRam Singh was dismissed w At the time when this appealwas taken up for hearing r none appearedfor the respondents 0 Co I have heard the Iearned counsel for the appellantsand I have gone throughthe records of the case C 6 4 Ili I At the outset it may be mentioned ttlere that the ElectionTribunal did not hear the Election Petition fiied by the Z appelIants on merits but dismissed the same by holding that C there was non complianceof Section 76 21 of the PunjabState I Election Commission Act 1994 or short the Act1 which C3 Z providesthat every EIection Petition shall be accompanied by m as many as copiesthereof as there are respondentsmentioned in the petition and every such copy shall be attested by the a Z petitioner under his own signaturesto be a true copy of the Ll petition Except petitioner No 1 other petitionershad not signed the extra copies supplied by the petitionersto the Court The Election Petition was filed by the petitioners on 1 92008 whereas the application alleging that there was norcompliance of the provisions of Section 76 20 of the Act was filed in June 2009 1e after a periodof about nlne months of the filing of the Election Petition Clearly the filing of the application regarding non compliance of the provisionsof Section 76 of the Act was a pioy JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SO l 0 e e FeA0 N04493 of 2009 l0 S Ml to deiaythe proceedings in the Election Petition a nd the Election Tribunal instead of dismissing the Election Petition on a technical groundoughtto have decided the same on merits The elections for Panches ofGram Panchayat 1 ChappaRam Singh were held on 2652008 The petitionersaiong r 2 with respondentsNos 2 to 4 were elected Panches of the 0C said Gram Panchayat The election of Sarpanch amongst Panches I was to be held on 1672008 The office of Sarpanchwas 9 I reserved for Women Three Panches petitioners Nos 2 to 4 hereinl supportedthe name of petitionerNo l for the office of Z and she oetitioner No l also consented to become e However respondent NoA who was the Presiding I officer objected to the election Of petitioner No l as C Z Sarpanch on the plea that the office of Sarpanchwas reserved GeneralCategory As petitioner No l belongsto a for womenin Scheduled Caste the PresidingOfficer objected to her oetitioner 7 Z NoJ becoming the Sarpanch Oe Section 55 of the Act providesthat a memberof theScheduled Castes shall not be disqualifiedto hold a seat not reservedfor members of those castes if he lel IS otherwise to hold such seat under the Constitution of India and the Act However respondent No2 was declared as Sarpanch althoughshe did not enjoy majority It requires to be taken notice of that in thls case inquiry was held by the Sub Divisional MagistrateI Am rltsar who JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 51 0 4 FeA0 N04493 of 2009 10 8 M1 vide his inquiry report dated 2172008 recommended fresh electionfor the omce ofSarpanch as petitionerNo 1 was having and the election held on 167 2008 was void and against normSe 1 For the aforesaid reasons thls appeal deserves r 2 acceptance The same is accordinglyallowed the impugned 0 0 order passed by the ElectionTribunal is set aside the election of I Sarpanch IS ordered to be held afresh a nd the Com m issio n er C5 Amritsar is directed to appoint some independent o bserve r to oversee the for the election of Sarpanch amongst Z the Panchesof Gram PanchayatChappaRam Singh District Amritsar CL TheCommissioner Amritsar shall comply with this order within I a period of one month of the receipt of a copy of this order Z 7 6 4a MOHINDER PAL OO MaylG 2011 JUDGE 1 ak 7 Z 1 tl 1J J Il 1 91 1 C Il i JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document