•s PETITIQNER ^TirHiGg^rM»"i»l »S^^i^ ~~^':'w^^ffi^w^^^^^^^^^^^^^ f~. ^— " - : : ! :' ' ; ^' , •'1 ' 1. - */ Jeevan l4t AAobnewOF s/o eaigarm ageddboyt ...•••" . ' .::: ' • ' -: ; : - ': ^•••"'>.-— SOyears Elect-ed Sarpanch R/o :<t5~^3y>-""""...-""" . ~ '".-.-.1 .,. ',, .',".:..' ' tfittage-AmliGleehTehsil Xt^ala faistict-^^ vgRsys RESPOMD6NS t. ^ /2.. S'e&^fXSSSsSWsssis^Ssi^-f.ssiSf. Stateof Chhattsgarh Through Secretary depwttnent of Panchgyate D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.6) Sub Otytsmot Officep(Revenue) Prescribed Authority .Oistl'. Korba(C.^) Bciharvtu^^ -3. ^ingh t^i^ct oBout 50 years R/o Vtlleg&Nav^ra fehsit kartdla t5JStrict-lft>rba(C<5) /4. Ram Singh l&nww S/o Bhagau aged dbout 45 years R/o Villege Amtideeh trfisil kQrtala tiistFJct-Korbt^ce) VVRTT PET:TreON_tffil^ Aft-^^ &26 AN& 227 OP -THg CQNSTrrimyQN QR INOtA^^^^^^^^^ / :s» HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SinaleBench: Ho^n'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. WritPetition (CIN0.7713/2007 Petitioner Respondents Jeevan Lal Mannewar Versus State of Chhattisgarh and Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 and 227 ofthe Constitution of India) Present: - Shri Ajit Singh, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Surya Kant Mishra, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Ashok Verma, counsel for respondent No.3. None for respondent No.4. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 03-03-2011) Vide order dated 14-08-2007, the Election Tribunal/Specified Officer in the matter of Panchayat Election, passed the impugned order setting aside the election of the petitioner holding that the petitioner does not belong to Scheduled Tribe category claimed by him and the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Amaldiha was reserved for a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe category. 2. By the impugned order, the Election Tribunal has entertained the dispute twith regard to caste of the petitioner at the instance of the election petitioner and has recorded a finding that the petitioner does not belong to the Scheduled Tribe category. 3. The sole submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the correctness and validity ofthe order passed bythe Election Tribunal is that the Election Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to decide the dispute with regard to caste status of the petitioner and this could be done only by the State Level Caste Scrutiny Committee. He relies upon the decision of this Court 2- ^ in the case of Rajkumari vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others, 2008(2) C.G.L.J. 45. Learned counsel submits that in view of the said order, the order passed by the Election Tribunal is clearly in excess of jurisdiction afrid authority vested in it under the law, and is liable to be set aside. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that during the pendency of the petition, the tenureof office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Amaldiha is over and as the petitioner has completed its tenure, issue has been rendered academic. 5. Though, period of the tenure of the petitioner is over, the order passed by the Election Tribunal has declared that the petitioner does not belong to the Scheduled Tribe category, therefore, theapprehension ofthe learned counsel for the petitioner that this order, if not set aside, would come in the way of the petitioner in the forthcoming elections of the area or it may be used against him elsewhere, cannot be discarded. 6. In the case of Rajkumari (supra), dealing with an identical situation where complaint has been made against the petitioner before the Election Tribunal for setting aside the election deciding the dispute with regard to caste status, this Court held that in so far as declaration of status of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe is concerned, the Revenue Authorities have decided the caste status ofthe petitioner without referring the matter to the State Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and the Court remitted the matter to the Sub Divisional Officer for deciding the matter afresh after decisionon the caste status of the petitioner by State Level Caste Scrutiny Committee. Therefore, the order of the Election Tribunal to the extent, it declares that the petitioner does not belong to the Scheduled Tribe category; it is clearly without Jurisdiction and is declared illegal iWis^KwaiwWK^Sg^. "~t> i> and inoperative in law. Since the petitioner's tenure has come to an end during the pendency ofthe present petition, no further orders are required to be passed. 7. With the aforesaid order, the petition is finally disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Tumane