FAO No.4811 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 4811 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.02.2011 Harjit Singh ...Appellant Versus Mehnga Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. M.S. Bal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sushil Saini, Advocate for the respondents. ..... RAJESH BINDAL, J. Challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 15.12.2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal, Amritsar (for short “the Tribunal”) dismissing the election petition filed by the appellant as time barred. Along with the appeal, an application seeking condonation of delay of 175 days in filing thereof has also been filed. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Nawan Pind Block Jandiala, Tehsil and District Amritsar was held on 16.07.2008. The appellant being aggrieved, filed Civil Writ Petition No.13701 of 2008 in this court, which was dismissed as withdrawn on November 5, 2008 with liberty to the appellant to file election petition before the Tribunal within three weeks from the date of the order. The appellant filed election petition on 15.12.2008. The same was dismissed as time barred. Hence, the present appeal has been filed before this court. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he could not file the election petition within time before the Tribunal as at the relevant time there was strike of the Advocates in District Courts, Amritsar, which prevented the appellant to prepare and file the petition before the Tribunal. FAO No.4811 of 2009 2 Considering that fact the delay in filing the election petition should have been condoned and decided on merit. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the election of Sarpanch could be challenged by filing the election petition within 45 days from the date of election in terms of Section 76 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (for short “the Act”). The delay in filing of the election petition cannot be condoned. However, in the writ petition, filed by the appellant three weeks time was granted to him on November 5, 2008 for filing the election petition. The appellant having not filed the election petition within the permissible time, the same has rightly been dismissed by the Tribunal. He further submitted that even after the order was passed on the election petition, the appellant filed Civil Misc. No.3264 of 2009 in the already decided Civil Writ Petition No.13701 of 2008 seeking extension of time, which was dismissed on February 20, 2009, rejecting the prayer of the appellant. However, it was observed that the appellant may challenge the order by way of appeal which can be filed before this court. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record. In terms of Section 76 of the Act the limitation for filing the election petition is of 45 days. There is no provision for condonation of delay in filing of election petition as it is a kind of suit. The election of respondent No.1 was challenged by the appellant before this court by filing C.W.P. No.13701 of 2008, which was dismissed as withdrawn on November 5, 2008, with liberty to the appellant to file election petition. However, it was observed in the order passed by this court that in case the appellant files the election petition within a period of three weeks from the date of order, the Tribunal was to decide the same expeditiously. The appellant failed to avail the liberty granted to him as the election petition was not filed within three weeks from the date of the order. It was only on this ground that the Tribunal held the petition to be beyond the period granted by this court and dismissed the same. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant that because of strike of the lawyers at Amritsar, he could not file the election petition in time, is totally misconceived. The strike of the lawyers FAO No.4811 of 2009 3 cannot be said to be a good ground for not filing the case within the period prescribed in law. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the present appeal, the same is dismissed and consequently the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is also dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 11.02.2011 sharmila