C.W.P. No.11268 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.11268 of 2009 Date of decision:29.07.2009 Kishan Chand and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr. I.P.S.Kohli, Advocate, for the petitioners. **** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL). Petitioners, in this writ petition, have impugned the order dated 16.07.2009 (P-5) declining their prayer, to allow them, to examine Handwriting Expert to compare signatures of petitioner Nos.4 and 6 with their alleged signatures, on proceedings register of the Gram Panchayat. Before respondent No.2, election of respondent No.3, as Sarpanch of village Badla, is under challenge. Election to the post of Sarpanch was conducted on 14.07.2008. Record reveals that earlier also, the petitioners came to this Court, by filing CWP No.12591 of 2008, with a prayer that, to conduct election to the post of Sarpanch, Presiding Officer be changed. That writ petition was disposed of in view of a fact that, in the meantime Returning Officer was changed by the Competent Authority. After election of respondent No.3 as Sarpanch, petitioners laid challenge to his election before the Election Tribunal C.W.P. No.11268 of 2009 -2- (respondent No.2). Private respondents moved a review application, in the writ petition filed by the petitioners, as mentioned above. When disposing of that application, this Court, vide order dated 28.05.2009, directed respondent No.2 to decide the election petition on or before 31.07.2009. It is not in dispute that when order mentioned above was passed, statements of petitioner Nos.4 and 6 had already been recorded by the Election Tribunal, wherein both have admitted their signatures on the disputed document. The Election Tribunal, by taking note of that fact, dismissed application filed by the petitioners, vide the impugned order. When rejecting their prayer for comparison of signatures, respondent No.2 observed as under: - “I have perused the signature of Smt. Jaspreet Kaur Petitioner Number 4 and Smt. Inderjit Kaur Petitioner No.6 put in the proceeding register on dated 14.07.2008 and their signature put on their statements available on the file. At first sight the signature put by them are seems to be similar and there seems no difference between them. Smt. Jaspreet Kaur and Smt. Inderjit Kaur have also accepted in their statements that in the proceeding register, there are their signature. As such there is no scope left to get the signature put on the proceeding registers to be examined through their Ld. Counsel from some Handwriting Expert and by doing so, it would be just to keep the case pending. As per instructions of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court already given in a filed Civil Writ Petition No.12591 of 2008, Kishan Chand Versus State of Punjab, this case is to be decided before 31.07.2009 and it does not seem C.W.P. No.11268 of 2009 -3- suitable to keep this case pending. Hence the application submitted by the petitioners dated 08.06.2009 is hereby dismissed and the Ld. Counsel for the petitioners was directed that he may produce his next evidence on 21.07.2009.” This Court feels that finding given above is perfectly justified. Once petitioner Nos.4 and 6 have admitted their signatures on the disputed document, it is not open to them to say to the contrary afterwards. Application appears to have been filed with a view to delay the proceedings. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed. July 29, 2009. ( JASBIR SINGH ) vinod JUDGE s