IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER Gopal Ram vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B.C.Writ Petition No.3968/07) Dated :- 29.11.2007 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr. Amit Dave, for the petitioner. Mr. S.G.Ojha, for the respondents. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought directions against the respondent no.2 Regional Assistant Director, Agriculture Marketing Department, Jodhpur to decide the election petition preferred by him under Rule 27-A of Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Market Rules, 1963 ( in short “the Rules of 1963” hereinafter),assailing the validity of election of respondent no.3 Shri Mahendra Meghwal,as member of Agriculture Market Committee, Jodhpur. The elections of the Agriculture Marketing Committee, Jodhpur were held in May, 2006 . The petitioner and the respondent no.3 contested the election for being chosen as a member of Market Committee from agriculturalists ' constituency Ward No.7. The result of the elections were declared on 18.5.06, wherein the respondent no. 3 was declared elected. The validity of election of respondent no. 3 was questioned by the petitioner by way of an election petition under Rule 27-A of the Rules of 1963 before the Regional Assistant Director, Agriculture Market Committee, Jodhpur. The election petition was accompanied by an application u/s 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay in filing the petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said election petition has not been decided by the Regional Assistant Director on account of pendency of a writ petition No.3009/06 before this Court. The respondents have filed a reply wherein inter alia it is stated that the election petition preferred by the petitioner could not be taken up for hearing inasmuch as presently the post of Regional Assistant Director is lying vacant. As per the provisions of Rule 27-A(1) of the Rules of 1963 if the validity of an election of a member of the Market Committee is brought in question by any person qualified either to be elected or to vote at the election to which such question refers, such person may ; within 7 days after the date of declaration of the result of the election may apply in writing to the Regional Assistant Director. As per Rule 27-A(2) of the Rules of 1963, on receipt of such application, the Regional Assistant Director may after giving an opportunity of hearing to the applicant to be heard after making such enquiry as he deems fit, pass an order confirming or amending the result of the election as well as setting the election aside. It goes without saying that the dispute pertaining to the elections of any democratic institutions should be decided expeditiously . It is not the case of the respondent that in the writ petition No.3009/06 said to be pending before this Court on identical issue any interim order restraining the Regional Assistant Director from deciding the election petition preferred by the petitioner is operating. Moreover,the respondents have taken the stand in the reply that the election petition could not be heard for the reason that the post of Regional Assistant Director,Jodhpur is lying vacant. The respondents cannot be permitted to prolong the decision of the election petition on one or other pretext in this manner. It is to be noticed that the term of the persons elected as member of the Market Committee is only three years, thus, if the decision of the election petition is deferred for an indefinite period then, the very purpose of filing the election petition shall stand frustrated. The respondents are under an obligation to expedite the hearing of the election petition keeping in view the object underlying the said provision incorporated in the Rules of 1963. In the result, the writ petition succeeds, it is hereby allowed. The respondent no.2 is directed to decide the election petition preferred by the petitioner expeditiously, in any case, within a period of two months from the date of this order.No order as to costs. (SANGEET LODHA),J.