FAO No.5000 of 2010 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 5000 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.01.2011 Amrik Singh ..Appellant vs Jaswant Singh & another ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. L. S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. P. K. Kataria, Advocate, for respondent no.1. Rajesh Bindal, J. Challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 29.06.2010, passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner-cum- Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal, Amritsar (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby election of the appellant as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Neshta District Amritsar, has been set aside. Election for the Gram Panchayat, Neshta was held on 26.05.2008. It consists of seven Panches. The office of the Sarpanch is reserved for Scheduled Caste category. Election for the office of Sarpanch was initially fixed for 17.07.2008, in which it is claimed that though all the seven Panches were present but none of them signed the proceedings. Allegedly on account of lack of coram matter was adjourned for 18.07.2008. On 18.07.2008, in the presence of only two Panches the appellant was declared elected as no coram was required. Election of the Gram Panchayat was challenged by respondent No.1 Jaswant Singh, before the Election Tribunal. Petition was accepted by the Election Commissioner and the election of the Sarpanch was directed to be held afresh. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that on 17.07.2008, the meeting had to be adjourned as none of the seven Panches present at the spot signed the minutes book. However, the Presiding Officer adjourned FAO No.5000 of 2010 (2) the meeting for 18.7.2008. On 18.7.2008 the appellant as well as another Panch Kewal Singh were present and in the election the appellant was declared elected. As there was no coram required for holding the adjourned meeting, election for the appellant as Sarpanch cannot be faulted with. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that though on 17.07.2008, all seven Panches were present but the meeting was not held properly by the Presiding Officer. He had to adjourn the meeting as none of the members present there even signed the minute book. For adjourning the matter the requisite norms as per the provisions of the Act/Rules were not adhered to. Respondent was not informed about the place and time of the adjourned meeting. As a result he could not come present at the time of meeting. Even otherwise. the appellant has been elected Sarpanch with support of only one other member though there were seven elected Panches in the Gram Panchayat. It was further submitted that the meeting which was scheduled on 17.07.2008 was to be held at Government Elementary School, Neshta. It is further submitted that as per the admission of Parkash Singh, Panch one of the elected Panches, meeting for 18.07.2008 was to be held at Government Elementary School, Neshta. However, the same was held at Block Office, Chogawan. Aforesaid facts clearly established that under suspicious circumstances the appellant who had support of only one Panch in the Gram Panchayat out of seven Panches has been elected as Sarpanch. He submitted that order passed by the Tribunal has already been complied with and respondent has been declared as Sarpanch. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper- book. From the facts as narrated above, it is clearly established that the election of Sarpanch held in the present case was totally under suspicious circumstances. A meeting was scheduled for the purpose on 17.7.2008 and all the seven panches were present but the Presiding Officer adjourned the meeting without there being any reason. For the adjourned meeting, no notice was issued to all the aforesaid panches. Election was held in a clandestine manner where the appellant was elected as Sarpanch only with the support of one other panch whereas in the panchayat consisting of seven panches, five panches are on the other side. Adjourned FAO No.5000 of 2010 (3) meeting for election of Sarpanch was to be held on 18.7.2008 at Government Elementary School, Neshta but was, in fact, held at Block Office, Chogawan. The aforesaid evidence clearly established the illegality in the process of election. Considering the aforesaid facts, the Tribunal while setting aside the election of Sarpanch had directed for holding of fresh election which cannot be faulted with. The election, in fact, had already been held and the person having majority has been elected as Sarpanch. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 25.1.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge