Satikar Singh vs State Election Commission and Others

N.C. Jain and B. Rai, JJ.—The question being short one, the present writ petition is being decided at the stage of motion hearing.

The pertinent question of law which arises in this case is whether on the death of a respondent in an election petition, it abates or not.

Before determining the aforesaid question of law, it is necessary to have a look at the facts of the case. The election to the Gram Panchayat, Sahlapur, Dis- trict Jalandhar, took place on 20.1.1993, under the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952. The petitioner and Gurdial Singh husband of respondent No. 5, were the only two candidates for the office of Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. Aforesaid Gur- dial Singh was declared elected. The petitioner aggrieved against the election of Gurdial Singh filed an election petition before the Prescribed Authority. The election was challenged on two grounds. This Court is primarily concerned with only one ground. It was a verred in the election petition that the petitioner secured more votes than Gurdial Singh, but he was declared defeated on account of it- regularities committed by the Returning Officer. In other words, the case of the petitioner was that the votes secured by him were counted in favour of Gurdial Singh as a result of which he was wrongly declared elected. It has remained un- disputed before us that the package containing the ballot papers were opened by the Presiding Officer who conducted the election at the time of giving evidence before the Tribunal. During the pendency of the election petition, Gurdial Singh died. After the death of Gurdial Singh, the authorities are wanting to conduct fresh election to fill up the vacancy of Sarpanch and to achieve this object notification Annexure P-1 has been issued. In pursuance of the notification, election programme Annexure P-2 has also been issued.

On the basis of the aforementioned facts, learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the election petition does not abate on account of death of a respondent in the election petition and, therefore, the action of the authorities in Conducting the election is illegal and without jurisdiction.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and after giving our thoughtful consideration to the entire matter, we are of the view that the argument is well merited. There is no provision in the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 envisaging the abatement of an election petition on the death of a respondent who has been declared successful. The only provision to which attention of the Court has been drawn is Section 13-P of the Act which pertains to the abatement of an election petition. Section 13-P of the Act in specific terms lays down that an election petition shall abate only on the death of a sole petitioner or to the survivor of several petitioners. The legislature has not enacted any provision to the effect that on the death of a respondent, election petition would abate. There was no obstacle in the way of the legislature to make a similar provision to the one like Section 13- P of the Act. In the absence of any provision pertaining to the abatement of an election petition on the death of a respondent and in view of the existence of a specific provision that an election petition would abate on the death of a petitioner, it can safely be concluded that the framers of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 did not contemplate that an election petition should abate on the death of a respondent. No other conclusion on this law point, in our considered view, is possible.

For the reasons recorded above, the present writ petition is allowed. The notification and election programme Annexures-Pl and P-2 respectively are hereby quashed. The petitioner has already closed his evidence in the election petition pending before the Prescribed Authority. Legal representative of deceased Gurdial Singh is before us. She would produce the entire'' evidence and the election Tribunal would not grant more than one opportunity to her for producing the en- tire evidence. The Tribunal would decide the election petition within one month from the date of the parties put in their appearance before it.

The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the Tribunal on the date fixed which is stated to be 23.2.1996.

A copy of this judgment be given dasti to the counsel for the parties on their paying requisite copying charges.