Harvans Singh vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Alok Singh, J.—Petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court assailing the election of respondent No. 4, who was declared elected as Village Pradhan of village Dhoomkheda, Block Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar on 29.06.2014. Undisputedly, election of Village Pradhan can be challenged under Section 12- C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. Undisputedly, petitioner has not approached Election Tribunal to challenge the election of respondent No. 4 within time.

Mr. T.K. Nailwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that as per report of the SDM/Deputy Collector, Sitarganj dated 23.02.2015 constituencies were wrongly formulated/constituted, which has materially affected the election.

Mr. T.K. Nailwal, Advocate for the petitioner, while placing reliance on the judgment of Full Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Lal Chand Vs. State of Haryana and Others, Punjab and Haryana 1 has vehemently argued that election of Panchayat/Muncipality can be challenged directly before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, therefore, writ petition challenging the election of the elected Gram Pradhan should not be thrown out on the ground of availability of alternative remedy of election petition under Section 12-C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act.

The Full Bench of Lal Chand Vs. State of Haryana and Others, while placing reliance on the judgment of Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. and others etc. Vs. Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti and others etc., has held that neither delimitation of Panchayat area nor of the constituency in the said area and the allotment of seats to the constituencies, could be challenged nor the Court could entertain such challenge except on the ground that before the delimitation, no objections were invited and no hearing was given; even this challenge could not be entertained, after notification for holding elections was issued.

In the case of Lal Chand Vs. State of Haryana and Others, , the delimitation of constituencies was challenged in the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and in those circumstances, the Full Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that election of Panchayat/Municipalities can be challenged directly before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, if legality of delimitation of Panchayat area, constituencies and allotment of seats to the constituencies is involved. In the case in hand, petitioner is not challenging the legality of delimitation of the Panchayat area or allotment of seats to the constituencies. Moreover, there is nothing on record to suggest that either soon before or soon after the election, legality of delimitation or allotment of seats was ever challenged by the petitioner.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since election petition could not be filed within the period of limitation prescribed, therefore, petitioner should be given liberty to approach Election Tribunal at this belated stage challenging the election of respondent No. 4 as Gram Pradhan, held in the month of June, 2014 and in the event of filing election petition within three weeks from today, same should not be dismissed on the ground of limitation.

Since no election petition was filed within the period of limitation and there is no provision to condone the delay in preferring the election petition, therefore, merely because petitioner was waiting for report of the Deputy Collector on the question of delimitation seems to be no ground to permit the petitioner to approach the Election Tribunal at this belated stage. Consequently, petition fails and is hereby dismissed in limine. CLMA No. 7244 of 2015 also stands disposed of accordingly.