IMPORTANT POINT
Lambardar does not hold an office of profit.

JUDGMENT

Surinder Singh Nijjar, J. —

1. Leave granted.

2. These appeals arise out of a common judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 5.12.2008 in Writ Petition Nos. 7727 of 2008, 8264 of 2008, 8270 of 2008, 8279 of 2008, 8310 of 2008 and 11724 of 2008.

3. The primary issues raised in all these writ petitions were:-

i) Whether the office of a Lambardar would be an ‘office of profit’ so as to disqualify the incumbent of such an office to seek election as Panch of the Gram Panchayat.

ii) Whether the Anganwari workers employed in the various social-welfare schemes in the State of Punjab held an ‘office of profit’ and consequently disqualified for seeking election to the Gram Panchayats.

iii) Whether the State Election Commissioner, Punjab was justified in issuing the clarificatory Memorandum, Memo No. SEC-2008/4365 dated 30.4.2008 on the subject “General Elections to Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads - 2008 Clarification regarding contesting of election by Lambardars and Anganwari workers.

4. Civil Writ Petition No. 7727 of 2008 was filed by a Lambardar, who was seeking election to the Gram Sabha, Village Ladpur, Tehsil Amloh, Distt. Fatehgarh Saheb. He had come to know from a news item in the Daily ‘Ajit’ dated 3.5.2008 that Lambardar and Anganwari workers have been debarred from contesting election as Member Panchayat. On enquiry, the appellant came to know that a Circular Memo No. SEC-2008/4365 has been issued conveyed to all the Deputy Commissioners-cum-District Electoral Officers in the State that Lambardars and Anganwari workers, who are ineligible to contest elections as Member of Panchayat because they hold ‘office of profit’. As a result of which, the appellant was debarred from contesting the election as Member Panchayat, which he intended to contest as he was otherwise duly qualified to contest the same. The prayer in the writ petition was for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned memorandum by which Lambardars and Anganwari workers have been debarred from contesting the elections.

5. Similarly, the Civil Writ Petitions No. 8264 of 2008, 8270 of 2008, 8279 of 2008 and 8310 of 2008 were filed by Anganwari workers claiming that they could not be disqualified as they were not holding any ‘office of profit’. Civil Writ Petition No. 11724 of 2008 sought a direction to the respondents not to permit respondent No. 5, who was an Anganwari worker to participate in the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of Village Ghaloti.

6. The High Court upon detailed consideration of the entire matter concluded that the office of Lambardars is an ‘office of profit’ and, therefore, the Lambardar would be disqualified from contesting the election. To this extent, the impugned memorandum was held valid. Consequently, Civil Writ Petition No. 7727 of 2008 was dismissed.

7. With regard to the Anganwari workers, the High Court held that the Anganwari workers did not hold any civil post under the Government. It is also held that the Anganwari workers do not hold an ‘office of profit’ under the State Government. Consequently, Civil Writ Petition Nos. 8264 of 2008, 8270 of 2008, 8279 of 2008 and 8310 of 2008 were allowed and the impugned memorandum was quashed so far as it pertained to the Anganwari workers.

8. In view of the decision rendered in the aforesaid writ petitions, Civil Writ Petition No. 11724 of 2008 for issuing direction not to permit the Anganwari worker, respondent No. 5, to participate in the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat was dismissed.

9. In this appeal, we are only concerned with the issue as to whether an incumbent Lambardar would hold an ‘office of profit’ under the Government.

10. Although by a common order, the High Court has decided the writ petitions in two parts. The first part relates to the Lambardars in C.W.P. 7727 of 2008 and connected matters. In these matters, the High Court crystallized three issues for consideration. Firstly, whether the disqualification prescri