IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 13894 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : 20.10.2008 Manvinder Singh .... PETITIONER Versus State Election Commission, Chandigarh and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. M.P.S. Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. N.P.S. Mann, Advocate, for respondent No.5. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioner, who contested the election of Panch of Gram Panchayat, Village Dialpura, District SAS Nagar, has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the notification dated 27.6.2008, whereby Mohinder Singh respondent No.5 has been wrongly notified as Panch of the Gram Panchayat. Undisputedly, the petitioner and respondent No.5 contested the election of Panch of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat against the seat reserved for General category. In the said election, the petitioner was declared as CWP No. 13894 of 2008 -2- elected as he secured 186 votes, whereas respondent No.5 Mohinder Singh was declared defeated, as he secured only 88 votes. It is also admitted position that the Presiding Officer cum Returning Officer sent result sheet for notification, but somehow or other, by mistake, the State Election Commission notified the name of Mohinder Singh respondent No.5 as Panch of the Gram Panchayat, instead of Manvinder Singh petitioner. In the written statement, filed on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3, the aforesaid mistake has been admitted. Therefore, on September 18, 2008, the case was adjourned for notifying the correct notification. Counsel for respondent No.5 has placed on record copy of the order dated 1.9.2008, passed by the State Election Commissioner, Punjab, whereby the recommendation of the District Electoral Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner, SAS Nagar, has been accepted and name of the petitioner has been ordered to be notified as elected Panch of the Gram Panchayat. Counsel for respondents No.1 to 4 further states that in view of this order, the necessary notification will be issued within a period of one month. In view of the aforesaid statement of counsel for respondents No.1 to 4, counsel for the petitioner states that he does not want to press this petition. Dismissed as not pressed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE October 20, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) ndj JUDGE