IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 974 of 2009 Date of decision:- 25.03.2009. Tripta Devi ...Petitioner Versus Neelam Kumari and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr. Parveen Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manohar Dadwal, Advocate for the respondents. JASWANT SINGH J.(Oral) By filing this revision petition against the orders dated 02.02.2009 and 16.02.2009 (Annexures P-2 and P-4) passed by the Presiding Officer-cum-Election Commission Tribunal, Hishiarpur the petitioner Tripta Devi, an elected Panch and subsequently as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of Village Marula, Block Hajipur, Tehsil Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur has raised the question regarding the maintainability of the election petition filed by respondent No.1-Neelam Kumari under Section 89/90 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 for setting aside the election of the petitioner as Panch held on 24.05.2008 and as Sarpanch held on 16.07.2008 of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat before the learned Election Tribunal. At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the question/issue regarding maintainability of the election petition challenging her election as Panch on 24.05.2008 being barred by C.R. No. 974 of 2009 -2- limitation, in view of sub section 1 of Section 76 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 has to be framed as a preliminary issue. He contends that vide the two impugned orders, the learned Presiding Officer has erred in not framing the preliminary issue of limitation by stating that the pleas shall be taken at a later stage. It is stated that in view of provision of sub section 1 of Section 76 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 an election petition before the Election Tribunal was maintainable, if filed within a period of 45 days from the date of election of the returned candidate. In the present case, admittedly the election petition was filed by Neelam Kumari challenging the election of petitioner Tripta Devi both as a Panch and a Sarpanch on 01.08.2008. Learned counsel for the contesting respondent Neelam Kumari states that he has no objection if the additional/preliminary issue of the election petition, filed by Neelam Kumari, challenging the election of petitioner Tripta Devi as Panch/Sarpanch being barred by limitation is framed. In view of the stand of learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that the preliminary issue of limitation shall be framed and decided by learned Election Tribunal before proceeding in the case. With the aforesaid direction, the present revision petition is disposed of. March 25, 2009 (JASWANT SINGH) vj JUDGE