Ujagar Singh alias Jagar Singh vs State of Punjab & others

J.V. Gupta, J.

The challenge in this writ petition is to the order of the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, dated 24.1.1987 (Annexure P.6), whereby the order of the prescribed authority under the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952, Dated 3.2.1986, setting aside the election of Ujagar Singh was confirmed in appeal.

Misra Singh respondent No. 4 challenge the ellection of Ujjagar Singh as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Halwara on the ground that his name does not figure in the voters list and as such, he was not qualified to contest the election of the Gram Panchayat. It was further alleged that Ujjagar Singh has wrongly mentioned his name as `Jagar Singh'' in the nomination papers filed by him. He is known by the name of Ujjagar Singh in the village. So, the nomination papers filed by Ujjagar Singh under the wrong name should have been rejected. The plea taken by Ujjagar Singh in his written statement was that he was known as Jagar Singh as well as, it was by the latter name that he was entered in the electoral roll of the village. The prescribed authority after discussing the entire evidence came to the conclusion that in these circumstances, it seems to me to be proved beyond reasonable doubt that signatures on the nomination papers of respondent No. 1 are not those of the respondent himself. It was further found that the nomination papers of respondent No. 1 i. e. Ujjagar Singh had been improperly accepted by the Returning Officer as it did not comply with the requirements of rule 6 of the Gram Panchayat Election Rules.

In appeal the point raised was whether the name of respondent No. 1 Ujjagar Singh figures in the voters list at serial No. 645 and if so, is there a misprinting and to what effect ? The learned Additional District Judge affirmed the finding of the prescribed authority and came to the conclusion that the nomination papers have been wrongly accepted. It was also found that : "Now coming to the misprinting, I do not think that there is any misprinting because his name is not Jagar Singh but Ujjagar Singh, nor he is known by the name of Ujjagar Singh alias Jagar Singh." In view of these findings the appeal was dismissed.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the said findings are wrong and illegal. The petitioner was also known as Jagar Singh and, therefore, the nomination papers were rightly accepted. It. was also contended that no finding has been given by the Additional District judge as to whether the result has been materially affected by wrongly accepting the nomination papers.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties. I do not find any merit in this writ petition It has been concurrently found as a fact that the petitioner was not known as Jagar Singh who was entered in the electoral roll. He is known as Ujjagar Singh and, therefore, the nomination papers have been wrongly accepted. In the circumstances, I do not find that there is any error apparent as to be interfered with in the writ jurisdiction.

As regards the second. contention, no such argument was raised before the learned Additional District Judge in appeal and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed to reagitate the same in writ jurisdiction. Moreover, the prescribed authority has rightly come to the conclusion that since the petitioner himself was elected whose nomination papers were wrongly accepted, the question of the result having been materially affected did not arise. The petitioner could not be elected on the ground as his nomination papers were wrongly accepted. Consequently, the petition fails and is dismissed with costs.