Harish Kumar, J. – This Court has heard Mr. Y. V. Giri, learned senior counsel duly assisted by Mr. Pranav Kumar, learned counsel representing the petitioner, Mr. S. B. K. Mangalam, learned counsel for the respondent no. 7, Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Girish Pandey, learned counsel for the State Election Commission and Ms. Rashmi Ranjan, learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner by invoking the prerogative writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of Memo No. 05/2022 dated 27.03.2023 issued under the signature of the State Election Commissioner by which the petitioner has been removed from the post of Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Gahai for purportedly being underage and the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari has been directed to take legal action in terms of Section 125 (Ka)(3) of the Panchayat Raj Act and Sections 177 and 181 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner further sought a direction commanding the respondents not to give effect to the order bearing Memo No. 05/2022 dated 27.03.2023 till final disposal of the writ petition.

3. The short facts, which led to the filing of the present writ petition is that in the month of October, 2021, the election for the post of Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Gahai under Dhaka Block was notified by the State Election Commission. The petitioner being eligible had filed her nomination paper for the post of Mukhiya on 27.09.2021. In the nomination paper, the petitioner had declared her age as 21 years by mentioning her date of birth as 25.01.1999. On the basis thereof, scrutiny was held, admittedly no objection was raised and finally the petitioner contested and was declared as a returned candidate for the post of Mukhiya.

4. The respondent no. 7 having lost the election being unsuccessful candidate filed Complaint Case No. 5/2022 before the State Election Commission questioning the election of the petitioner on the ground that on the alleged date of nomination, the petitioner was underage and had not attained the age of 21 years as mandatorily required under Section 136(1)(b) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, which is evident from the matriculation certificate of the petitioner showing her date of birth as 25.01.2002. Thus, on the date of nomination the age of the petitioner was only 19 years 8 months and 10 days. Pursuant to the registration of Complaint Case No. 5/2022, notice was issued to the petitioner informing her to appear and contest the case along with the documentary evidence in her support. In response to the aforesaid notice, the petitioner filed a detailed explanation before the State Election Commission refuting the allegation made in the complaint, copy of which is marked as Annexure-6 to the writ application. In the meantime, the Returning Officer-cum-Block Development Officer, Dhaka, East Champaran vide his letter dated 07.02.2022 (Annexure-5) requested the District Panchayat Raj Officer, East Champaran, Motihari to conduct an enquiry on the petition filed by the complainant.

5. In the explanation filed by the petitioner, she specifically stated her date of birth as 25.01.1999 and in support of the aforesaid contention, Voter I.D. card, PAN card, Aadhar card and birth certificate issued from the office of the Department of Economics and Statistics, Government of Nagaland as also the transfer certificate issued from the Vidhya Bhawan Higher Secondary School, K. Kire Colony, Dimapur, Nagaland have been brought on record showing her date of birth as 25.01.1999.

6. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that her actual date of birth is 25.01.1999 as per the records available with the Vidhya Bhawan Higher Secondary School, K. Kire Colony, Dimapur, Nagaland. However, after retirement of her father, the family shifted to Motihari in the year 2012 where she took admission in DAV Public School, Narha, Panapur but due to mistake of the Clerk her date of birth was recorded as