IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 14771 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION: OCTOBER 01, 2008 Smt.Sawinder Kaur and others .....PETITIONERS Versus Punjab Election Commission and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR --- Present: Mr. V.K. Sandhir, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.M.S.Sindhu, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for respondents No.2 and 3. Mr.Rahul Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.4 and 5. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) The petitioners, who have been elected as Panches of Gram Panchayat Village Gujjarpura, have filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuing direction to respondents No.3 and 4 to declare Smt.Sawinder Kaur-petitioner No.1 as elected Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat in view of the meeting held on 29.7.2008, which, according to the petitioners, has been wrongly dated as 23.7.2008. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No.5, it has been averred that in fact no meeting for the election of Sarpanch was fixed for 29.7.2008, as claimed by the petitioners. Rather, in the meeting held on 21.7.2008, Harpartap Singh-respondent No.5 had already been declared elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. After arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioners states C.W.P. No. 14771 of 2008 -2- that in view of the disputed questions of facts raised in this writ petition and further in view of decision of this Court in Baljit Singh v. State of Punjab and others (CWP No.13643 of 2008, decided on August 22, 2008), wherein it has been held that in view of Clause (b) of Article 243-O of the Constitution of India and Section 74 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), election of Sarpanch is to be challenged by filing an election petition under Section 76 on the grounds mentioned in Section 89 of the Act, the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail the remedy of election petition. However, counsel for the petitioners submits that since the election petition was to be filed within 45 days from the date of election of the office of Sarpanch and within the said limitation, the petitioners had approached this Court and filed the present writ petition, therefore, in view of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Danda Rajeshwari v. Bodavula Hanumayamma and others, (1996) 6 SCC 199, the petitioners may be permitted to file election petition within three weeks from today and in case election petition is filed within three weeks, the same may be directed to be heard on merits by the Election Tribunal. Counsel for respondent No.5 has no objection if the prayer made by counsel for the petitioners is accepted. After hearing counsel for the parties and going through the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court, we permit the petitioners to withdraw this petition with liberty to file an election petition within three weeks under Section 76 read with Section 89 of the Act, challenging the election of respondent No.5. Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. If the election petition is filed by the petitioners within a period of three weeks from today, the Election Tribunal is directed to decide the same on merits expeditiously. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE October 01, 2008 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) vkg JUDGE