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 · 199 wordsSatish Kumar Mittal, J.—The petitioner, who is a resident of village Gharyala Khurd, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, has filed the instant petition for quashing the order dated 25.6.2013 (Annexure P-5), passed by the Returning Officer, whereby name of respondent No. 7 has been included in the list of candidates for the post of Panch of Ward No. V of the village. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we are not inclined to entertain this petition, as the election process has already started. The elections are scheduled to be held on July 03, 2013. 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 petitioners to avail the alternative remedy of filing the election petition challenging the election of the successful candidate on the aforesaid ground.
