IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 16761 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : 08.12.2008 Lakhbir Kaur .... PETITIONER Versus State of Punjab and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. R.K. Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3. Ms. G.K. Mann, Advocate, for respondents No.4 to 8. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) Petitioner-Smt. Lakhbir Kaur was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Village Ballian Manjpur, District Amritsar, in the meeting held on 28.7.2008. Against her election, a complaint was filed by Smt. Kulwant Kaur-respondent No.4 and 4 of her supporter Panches, about the illegality committed by the Presiding Officer in the election of the Sarpanch on 28.7.2008. The said complaint was enquired into by the Sub Division Election Officer -cum- Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amritsar-I. When the said enquiry was pending, the petitioner filed CWP No. 14269 of 2008 for CWP No. 16761 of 2008 -2- issuing direction to the respondents to notify her name as elected Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, on the basis of her election as Sarpanch in the meeting held on 28.7.2008. During the pendency of the said petition, vide notification dated 12.8.2008, name of the petitioner was notified as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. In view of this fact, on 5.9.2008, on the statement made by counsel for the petitioner that name of the petitioner has been notified as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, the said petition was dismissed as infructuous. The said order was passed in presence of counsel for the respondents-State, who did not raise any objection to the dismissal of the said writ petition as having become infructuous. In the meanwhile, the District Electoral Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar, vide his letter dated 3.9.2008, on the report of the Sub Division Election Officer -cum- Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amritsar-I, to the effect that election of the petitioner as Sarpanch was held in the absence of the observer, cancelled the proceedings of the meeting held on 28.7.2008 and authorised the Assistant Project Officer, DRDA, Amritsar, as a new Presiding Officer to re-conduct the election of the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. When the notice of the said meeting was issued, the petitioner, whose name had already been notified as elected Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, filed the instant petition. In the written statement, filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that name of the petitioner was wrongly notified, as the proceedings dated 28.7.2008 were cancelled on the basis of a report given CWP No. 16761 of 2008 -3- by the observer. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 to 3 has pointed out that in view of COCP No. 1322 of 2008, filed by Smt. Kulwant Kaur-respondent No.4 and 4 other Panches, for violation of the general direction that elections of Sarpanches be conducted in presence of the observer, the aforesaid decision of cancellation of result was taken. However, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 could not justify the cancellation of the proceedings after issuance of final notification of the election of the petitioner as a Sarpanch of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat. Counsel for respondents No.4 to 8 could not controvert the aforesaid legal position that after the notification of the result, the proceedings in which the Sarpanch was elected could not have been cancelled. However, she states that at least Smt. Kulwant Kaur (respondent No.4), who is having the support of four other Panches, should be permitted to challenge the election of the petitioner as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, who was illegally declared elected in the meeting held on 28.7.2008. She, after having instructions from her clients, further states that respondents No.4 will withdraw the aforesaid COCP No. 1322 of 2008. Counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 as well as counsel for respondents No.4 to 8, on instructions, further state that respondents have no objection, if this writ petition is allowed and the notice dated 10.9.2008, issued by the District Electoral Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar, ordering for re-election of Sarpanch, is set aside. CWP No. 16761 of 2008 -4- Consequently, the impugned notice dated 10.9.2008 (Annexure P-5) is hereby set aside, as the petitioner was already declared elected as Sarpanch and her name has also been notified. However, in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we permit respondents No.4 to 8 to file the election petition within a period of 3 weeks from today, challenging the election of the petitioner on the ground that her election in the meeting held on 28.7.2008 was not proper and she was illegally elected. If any such election petition is filed, the same will be decided on merits, expeditiously. Counsel for the petitioner states that if any such election petition is filed, the petitioner will not raise any objection regarding the limitation. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE December 08, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) ndj JUDGE