JUDGMENT

Jagdish Singh Khehar, J. - Leave granted.

2. The issue, which is subject matter of consideration in the instant appeal, relates to the validity of the election of the appellant-Duni Chand as Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Ghanala, Sub-Tehsil Sandhol, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. Nomination papers in the aforesaid election were to be submitted from 13th to 15th December, 2010. In the election programme issued vide notification dated 4.12.2010 (by the State Election Commission, Himachal Pradesh), 16.12.2010 was fixed for scrutiny of the nomination papers. It is not a matter of dispute, that the appellant submitted his nomination papers well in time on 15.12.2010. It is therefore apparent, that the submission of nomination papers was in conformity with the election programme.

3. The case set up against the appellant was, that his nomination papers were liable to be rejected on scrutiny. Insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, the assertion against the appellant was, that an ejectment order from government land was rendered against the appellant, by the Assistant Collector, 2nd Grade, Sandhole, on 12.4.2010. It was pointed out, that the above ejectment order rendered the acceptance of the nomination papers invalid. In this behalf, reliance was placed on Section 122(1)(c) of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the `1994 Act'). A relevant extract of the aforesaid provision is being reproduced hereunder :

"122(1) :-

(a) & (b) xxx xxx xxx

(c) - If he or any of his family member(s) has encroached upon any land belonging to, or taken on lease or requisitioned by or on behalf of, the State Government, a Municipality, a Panchayat or a Co-operative Society unless a period of six years has elapsed since the date on which he or any of his family member, as the case may be, is ejected there from or ceases to be the encroacher; or

Explanation - For the purpose of this clause the expression "family member" shall mean the spouse, their son(s), unmarried daughter(s) and adopted son and unmarried daughter.

(bb) to (o) xxx xxx xxx

(2) xxx xxx xxx"

4. The fact that the above order of ejectment dated 12.4.2010 was indeed rendered against the appellant is not a matter of dispute. Despite the same, the nomination papers submitted by the appellant were accepted and he was permitted to contest the election, scheduled for 1.1.2011. Election was indeed conducted on 1.1.2011. The appellant succeeded in the above election, inasmuch as the largest number of votes were cast in his favour.

5. A challenge to the election of the appellant was raised on the ground that the appellant's nomination papers could not have been accepted. This challenge was refuted by the appellant by asserting, that the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Sarkaghat vide order dated 20.12.2010 had stayed the operation of the ejectment order dated 12.4.2010. The order dated 20.12.2010 is available on the record of this case as Annexure P-1. Subsequently, the appeal preferred by the appellant against the ejectment order dated 12.4.2010 was also accepted, on 30.07.2011. The said order is also available on the record of this case as Annexure P-3. It was accordingly the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, that disqualification of the appellant on the date of scrutiny of nomination papers stood wiped out, and as such, since the said disqualification did not exist, the determination of the Returning Officer, in accepting the nomination papers submitted by the appellant, could not be interfered with.

6. The question that arises for our consideration is, whether the appellant, whose disqualification was negated, firstly by the interim order dated 20.12.2010, and subsequently by the acceptance of his appeal on 30.7.2011, can be permitted to continue as Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, consequent upon his being declared elected on 1.1.2011.

7. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is, that the election of the appellant