AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 234 wordsSatish Kumar Mittal, J.—The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition for quashing the order passed by the Returning Officer (respondent No. 4 herein) declaring respondent No. 5 as unanimously elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of Village Kalyan, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot. It is the case of the petitioner that he had submitted his nomination papers to contest the elections of Sarpanch of the said village, but by forging his signatures, his nomination papers were shown to be withdrawn, and thereafter, respondent No. 5 was declared as unanimously elected Sarpanch.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, when the election process has already started and the elections are scheduled to be held on July 03, 2013, we are not inclined to entertain this petition, as the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy to challenge the election of the successful candidate on the aforesaid ground. Thus, in view of these facts and the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in N.P. Ponnuswami Vs. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency and Others, Boddula Krishnaiah and another Vs. State Election Commissioner, A.P. and others, ; and Election Commission of India Through Secretary Vs. Ashok Kumar and Others, , at this stage, this petition cannot be entertained. Dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of filing the election petition challenging the election of the successful candidate on the aforesaid ground.
