The elections to the Mandal Parishad, Kurupam Mandal, Vizianagaram District, were held in the year 2006. The petitioner and the 5th respondent filed their nominations for being elected as MPTC members from G.Sivada Segment. The petitioner was declared elected as Chairman, in the elections held on 28.06.2006.

The 5th respondent filed O.P.No.1 of 2006, before the Agency Divisional Officer (Revenue Divisional Officer) - cum -Election Tribunal, Parvathipuram (for short 'the Tribunal'). The only ground urged by him was that the petitioner incurred disqualification under Section 19(3) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short 'the Act'), in as much as he had three children by the date of filing of nomination. The petitioner denied the allegation and contested the O.P. Through its order, dated 05.02.2009, the Tribunal allowed the O.P., and had set aside the election. The same is challenged in this Writ Petition. Sri Nandigama Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the child, by name, Anwesh, who was alleged to be the third son of the petitioner, is, in fact, the son of the petitioner's brother, by name, Badraiah and though adequate material was placed before the Tribunal, a finding to the contrary was recorded. He contends that the Tribunal did not follow the prescribed procedure, be it, in the context of administration of oath or recording of depositions. Learned counsel submits that though it was elicited through the Head Mistress of the school, who was examined as PW.5, that the records of the school were tampered, the same was not taken into account.

Sri Somakonda Reddy, learned counsel for the 5th respondent, on the other hand, submits that it was established beyond any pale of doubt that the petitioner had three children, and thereby, incurred disqualification under Section 19(3) of the Act.

The only ground on which the 5th respondent challenges the election of the petitioner is one referable to Section 19(3) of the Act. The provision reads as under:

"A person having more than two children shall be disqualified for election or for continuing as member:

Provided that the birth within one year from the date of commencement of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 hereinafter in this section referred to as the date of such commencement, of an additional child shall not be taken into consideration for the purposes of this section:

Provided further that a person having more than two children (excluding the child if any born within one year from the date of such commencement) shall not be disqualified under this section for so long as the number of children he had on the date of such commencement does not increase:

Provided also that the Government; may direct that the disqualification in this section shall not apply in respect of a person for reasons to be recorded in writing."

From a perusal of this provision, it becomes clear that an individual would be disqualified to contest in the election, or to hold an elected office, in case he has more than two children, as on 20.05.1994, on which date the Act came into force. The second proviso relieves the rigor to certain extent, in case a child, in excess of two, is born, within one year on which date the Act came into force; the disqualification does not get attached.

The allegation made by the 5th respondent against the petitioner is that the third child, by name, Anwesh was born on 10.05.1998. If this is true, the disqualification gets attached. The plea of the petitioner was that Anwesh was the child of his brother, by name Badraiah. That means he has disowned the child. Therefore, the entire controversy turns around, whether Anwesh was the child of the petitioner, or his brother, Badraiah.

On his part, the 5th respondent examined as many as 7 witnesses. They included the Village Revenue Officer, Anganwadi Teacher, Head Mistress of Z.P.P.S School, where the child was admitted, Head Master of another school, and Medical Officer of the P