Mr. Brijlal vs State of Punjab and others

This order will dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 13404 of 1994 and 13579 of 1994.

Election under the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 were announced. Nomination papers were to be filed as per schedule of elections declared. These petitions are being disposed of at motion stage. Nomination papers of the petitioners were rejected. They have approached this Court in these petitions alleging that the nomination papers were wrongly rejected. The actual elections are ordered to be held on Spetember 30, 1994. These petitions cannot be entertained ac this stage. As the election process started, it has to continue to its legitimate end. It will be open to the petitioners to challenge the elections in the Election Petition on the ground asserted that their nomination papers were wrongly rejected. Similar view was taken by this Bench in C. W. P. No. 13276 of 1994, Jawahora Ram Sarpanch v. Punjab State etc., decided on September 20, 1994 at the motion stage. In that case, in the election rolls, name of the petitioner was not included and he was thus illegally debarred from contesting the elections as alleged although in the last election, he was duly elected as Sarpanch. While dismissing the petition, it was observed that the petitioner should have approached the competent authority to correct the electoral rolls and this would be done within the time presented.

In the present case, as already stated above, nomination papers were rejected. According to the petitioners, this was done maia fide to deprive the petitioners from contesting the elections, Article 243(o) of the Constitution provides that no election to any Pan-chayat shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State. The word ''election'' has to be so interpreted to include the entire process of the election which commences from inviting nomination papers and ends with the declaration of election as held by the Supreme Court in N.P. Ponnuswami Vs. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency and Others, . The object of the amendment made in the Constitution and addition of Article 243(o) is to complete the process of election when commences otherwise if at the initial stages, the Courts would interfere in the matter and stay the holding of the elections, it would frustra e the purpose of forming democratic form of Government.

Earner decisions of this Court that under Article 226, the Court can entertain petitions at the initial stage for redressal of bona fide greviances in election matters, are not helpful in view of provisions of Article 243(o) of the Constitution. The election as scheduled are to be held and the same can be questioned, as stated above, only in the manner prescribed. These petitions are, therefore, dismissed.

Petitions dismissed.