THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.5249 OF 2007 DATED 17TH FEBRUARY, 2011 BETWEEN Kakarla Venkata Ratnam …Petitioner And The Election Tribunal constituted under A.P.Panchayat Raj (Election Tribunals in Respect of Gram Panchayats, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads) Rules, 1995- cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Vijayawada and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.5249 OF 2007 ORDER: The order dated 06.03.2007 passed by the Election Tribunal- cum-Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, in O.P.No.15 of 2006 is under challenge. The petitioner contested for the post of Sarpanch, Chodavaram Gram Panchayat of Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District, in the elections held on 02.08.2006. The second respondent herein emerged successful in the said election by a margin of 13 votes. The petitioner filed an Election Petition under Section 233 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 1994’) before the Election Tribunal constituted under the said Act-cum-Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, alleging that the Returning Officer had committed irregularities in the counting of votes and also, invalidation of votes, polled in his favour. The Election Petition was taken on file by the Election Tribunal as O.P.No.15 of 2006. By its order dated 06.03.2007, the Election Tribunal returned the Election Petition on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the same and that the District Court was the competent authority to decide and determine the question of disqualification of members/Sarpanch for any offences/ irregularities in accordance with Section 22 of the Act of 1994. Perusal of the said order would reveal that the Election Tribunal was swayed by the fact that the Act of 1994 specifies qualifications/disqualifications of the candidates under Sections 17 to 20 thereof and provides, under Section 22 thereof, that in the event any allegation is made against an elected member of a Gram Panchayat by a voter/authority in writing to the Executive Authority that he is not qualified or has become disqualified under Sections 17 to 20, such Authority upon giving notice of such allegation to the member concerned and upon the same being disputed by such member, shall, on the direction of the Gram Panchayat or the Commissioner, apply to the District Court concerned for a decision. The Election Tribunal construed this provision to mean that all petitions pertaining to disqualification of elected members, including those other than the disqualifications covered by Sections 17 to 20 of the Act of 1994 would fall within the ambit of Section 22. Based on this construction, the Tribunal opined that it had no jurisdiction to deal with the subject Election Petition. Reference was made by the Tribunal to decisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction by the District Court in matters covered by Section 22 of the Act of 1994. Unfortunately, the Tribunal completely lost sight of Section 233 of the Act of 1994 under which the subject Election Petition had been filed. Section 233 lays down in no uncertain terms that no election held under the Act of 1994 shall be called in question except by way of an Election Petition presented to such authority and in accordance with such Rules as may be made in this behalf. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 233 and 268(1) of the Act of 1994, the Government of Andhra Pradesh framed the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Election Tribunals in respect of Gram Panchayats, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads) Rules, 1995 vide G.O.Ms.No.111, PR, RD & R (Elec.-III) Department, dated 03.03.1995. Rule 2 of the said Rules clearly stipulates that the Court of the District Munsiff, presently designated as Junior Civil Judge, having territorial jurisdiction over the place in which the Office of the Gram Panchayat is located shall be the Election Tribunal for deciding Election Petitions filed under Section 233 of the Act of 1994 in respect of an Election to the post of Member, Sarpanch or Upa-Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. It is relevant to note that the Election Petition was instituted on the ground that irregularities were committed by the Returning Officer in counting of the votes and invalidating certain votes polled in favour of the petitioner and also for counting a single person’s vote twice. These grounds do not fall under the disqualifications stipulated under Sections 17 to 20 of the Act of 1994. The reasoning of the Election Tribunal that Section 22 of the Act of 1994 is all encompassing and would cover all petitions calling for a decision for disqualifying an elected member/ Sarpanch, irrespective of whether such disqualification falls within Sections 17 to 20 of the Act of 1994, does not stand to reason or logic. In the light of Section 233 of the Act of 1994 and the Rules framed thereunder, it is clear that the petitioner could have only maintained an Election Petition under Section 233 against the election of the second respondent on the grounds raised by him. The order dated 06.03.2007 in O.P.No.15 of 2006 on the file of the Election Tribunal-cum-Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, is accordingly set aside and the matter is remanded to the said Court for consideration and disposal on merits. As the matter has been kept pending owing to the erroneous order passed by the Tribunal and would be rendered infructuous by further delay, there shall be a direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the same expeditiously and preferably within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed but in the circumstances, without any order as to costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 17TH FEBRUARY, 2011. VGSR