k . v PETITIONER i @uPm/a/Mi ‘¥? :5” .o‘m'as ' C/(3 wa-q/; TN THF HON’BLE HTGH COURT OF CHHATI'ISGARH AT BILASPUR' , (C.G.‘) ‘_ Sawan Singh, S/o Ghasiram, aged About 53 years, resident of Village Bahaliyatota-Sarbahara, Tehsil Pendra Rbad, , District Bilaspur, . Chhattisgarh (Elected Sarpanch of Village Panchayat Sarbahara) . VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary, Panchayat and N Rural Department, D'.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Chhattisgarh ' Smt. Pree’tam Pandram, W/o Shri Uda-y Singh Pandram, Caste Gond, resident of Village Sarbahara, Kamlesh, S/o Birju, age not known, resident of Village Sarbahara, Teshil Pendra Road, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh Naryodh'an Singh, S/o Ram Prasad,‘ I age not known, resident of Village Kateltola, Sarbahara, Teshil Pendra ROad, .r District Chhattisgarh Sotam Singh 525’?” ‘ Tehsil' Pendra Road,‘ District, Bilaspur, Kushro, S/o Thakurdeen Kushro, age not WRIT PETITION (C) No. ZWLKD or 2011 , Bilaspur,Chhattisgarh @Jyho’rifgi) ‘ RESPONDENTS ‘ ‘ ' ‘ I ' known, I ‘resident ’ of Village Kurripéra, Sarbahara, Tehsil Pendra Road, District ‘Bilaspur,:" Chhattisgarh 6. I Tejraj Singh Portey, S/o Hiralél‘ Portey; age not known, resident of’ , . , VilIageJ Jogidongri, Sarbahara, V ‘ _ V Teshil Pendra Road,‘ District ,Bilaspu‘r, Chhattisgath ’ 7. Returning Officer Panchayat (Shri Mithileéh Dondey), Tehsil Officer Pendra Road,' District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 8. S.D.O. (Revenue) Pendra Road, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OE THE CONSTITUTION OF ‘ INDIA ‘ ‘ ‘ ’ W HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 2440 of 2011 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA I SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Aqnihotri, J. Present: Shri Prakash Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner. ' Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORALI (Passed on 9‘ day of May, 201 1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue of caste of the petitioner came into consideration when the petitioner was elected earlier in the year‘2000, wherein the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pendra Road, Bilaspur,‘ by order‘dated 12/03/2001, took a decision that in absence of caste verification by the High Power Caste Scrutiny (for short “the Committee"), the caste as agitated by other side, cannot be decided. Thereafter, the petitioner contested the election for the post of Sarpanch again in January, 2010 and was declared duly elected. Thus, the election petition filed by the respondent No.2, is not maintainable in View of the fact that the issue of caste was not decided earlier. 2. Learned counsel further [submits that this creates res judicata, as such, the election petition is not maintainable. Learned counsel next submits that the issue of caste of the petitioner has already been clarified in the family employment card (Annexure P/5). Be that as it may, the status of the caste of the petitioner has not been conciuded and the order wherein it was observed that the Committee alone is competent to decide the issue of caste in the earlier election petition. cannot createra res judicata as no issue was decided. Even otherwise, the present election petition challenging the election of the petitioner on the post ofISarpanch cannot be rejected on any other ground except the‘ground specified under Section 122 of Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam,'1993. ~ Thus, there is no merit in this case and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. rj‘ j Satish K.Agnihotri Judge — Sty. .ix ”,i / i I PETITIONER Sawan Singh VERSUS RESPONDENTS ‘ State of Chhattisgarh & Others.