IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. *** FAO NO. 4837 OF 2005. DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 27, 2007. *** BALDEV SINGH VERSUS THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL (DEPUTY COMMISSIONER), MUKTSAR AND ORS. *** BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.S.MADAN. *** PRESENT: Shri R.K.Girdhar, Advocate, for the appellant. Shri Surinder Garg, Advocate, for respondent No.2. the only contesting respondent-Jagsir Singh. *** R.S.Madan, J (Oral) By filing the present appeal, the petitioner Baldev Singh has challenged the order dated August 09, 2005 passed by the Election Tribunal (Deputy Commissioner), Muktsar, whereby the election petition filed by the petitioner against respondent No.2, herein, was dismissed. In the instant appeal the question which has been posed before this Court by the appellant is- whether a person who is neither permanent resident not voter of the village, can contest the election of Sarpanch in that Village? The answer to the question can be determined, after having a glance to the facts of the present case. It is the contention of the counsel for the appellant that respondent Jagsir Singh is not the permanent resident of Village Chak Motle Wala He is the permanent resident of Village Marar Kalan. However, the respondent Jagsir Singh got his name enrolled in the voter list of Village Chak Motle Wala only on 19.06.2003 which was the last date for filing nomination papers for the election of Sarpanch to be held on 29.06.2005. It is the case of the appellant that at the time of filing of nomination papers by Jagsir Singh, this objection was raised before the Election Commissioner, at -2- FAO NO. 4837 OF 2005. the time of scrutiny of nomination papers, but his objection was not considered and the nomination papers filed by respondent Jagsir Singh, were accepted. The learned counsel for the appellant urges that in the election, the appellant received 188 votes whereas respondent Jagsir Singh received 181 votes and 16 votes which were polled in his favour were wrongly rejected by the Returning Officer. As a result of which, respondent Jagsir Singh was illegal declared as Sarpanch of the Village. The pleas taken up by the appellant were controverted by the respondents. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned order dated August 09, 2005 passed by the Election Tribunal (Deputy Commissioner), Muktsar. It is well settled principle of law that a person whose name is enrolled in the voter list in any part of India, can contest the election by getting himself enrolled in that constituency. It is admitted by the appellant himself in the petition that the respondent Jagsir Singh got his name enrolled in the voter list of Village Chak Motle Wala on 19.6.2003. The contention of the counsel for the appellant that at the time of filing of the nomination papers by the respondent, the appellant has raised objection regarding his not being the voter and permanent resident of the village, before the Returning Officer, but his objection was not considered and declined. It is the duty of the Returning Officer to receive the nomination papers, after verifying the fact that the name of the person, who is going to file the nomination is entered in the voter list of the village or not. The Returning Officer has received the supplementary list of votes from the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Muktsar in respect of village Chak Motle Wala, which was relied upon by him, wherein Jagsir Singh was shown the voter of village Chak Motle Wala. Further the plea of the appellant that he received 181 votes and out of that 16 votes were illegally rejected by the Returning Officer -3- FAO NO. 4837 OF 2005. is not made out from the Election Result Form No. 9, wherein it was mentioned that the appellant received 172 votes whereas the respondent Jagsir Singh-the returned candidate received 181 votes, therefore, the Returning Officer has declared the result of the respondent Jagsir Singh, as having been elected as Sarpanch. There is not even an iota of evidence lead by the parties that the appellant received 182 votes and 16 votes polled in his favour were illegally rejected by the Returning Officer. As a result, the order dated August 09, 2005 passed by the learned Election Tribunal, Muktsar, being the well reasoned order, so call for no interference. The appeal being without any merit, is hereby dismissed. (R.S.Madan) Judge August 27, 2007. Malik