( 1 ) THE petition is directed against the impugned orders at Ann- exures A and B to the petition whereby a declaration was made that the petitioner is disqualified as a Panchayat Member of the Jam Jodhpur Nagar Panchayat under sec. 23 (i) (g) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961 on the ground that the petitioners daughter was in service of the Boys and Girls High School run by the Nagar Panchayat and hence the peti- tioner had interest in the work done by the Panchayat.

( 2 ) AT the relevant time the petitioner was duly elected member of the Panchayat of the Jam Jodhpur Nagar Panchayat in the elections held in December 1972 When the petition was filed it was averred that under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act the petitioner was entitled to continue as Panchayat member for a period of five years till the next elections were held of the Nagar Panchayat of Jam Jodhpur. The petitioners daughter named Chandrikaben was appointed in the Boys and Girls High School run by the Nagar Panchayat of which the petitioner was a member. In this background respondent No. 2 declared the petitioner to be disqualified as a member of the Nagar Panchayat under sec. 23 (i) (g) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961 Sec. 23 (i) (g) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961 provides as follows in so far as it is relevant to this petition :"23 No person shall be a member of a Panchayat or continue as such who- x x x x x x x x (f) has directly or indirectly by himself or his partner any share or interest in any work done by order of the Panchayat or in any contract with by or on behalf of or employment with or under the Panchayat. Explanation 1. A person shall not be disqualified under clause (g) for membership of a Panchayat by reason only of such person x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x (b) merely being a relative of a person in employment with or under or by or on behalf of the panchayat.

( 3 ) IT was submitted that the word relative occurring in clause (g) of Explanation 1 to sec. 23 would include all relatives near or remote. It was also submitted that the word relative would thus include wife a son a daughter or the like near relatives. It was urged that on correct interpre- tation of the relevant provisions of sec. 23 (1) (g) read with Explanation 1 (g) of the Act would go to show that merely because a son or a daug- hter of a member of a Panchayat is in service of an institution run by the Panchayat would not by itself disqualify the concerned member as a Panchayat member.

( 4 ) THE aforesaid point was considered by this Court in its decision in Special Civil Application No. 365 of 1966 decided by Honble Mr. Justice I. B. Mehta on March 2 1970 In the aforesaid case the petitioner was the member of Sami Gram Panchayat and the Collector dismissed the Panchayat members appeal against the order of District Development officer-respondent No. 1 holding that the petitioner was disqualified from membership under sec. 23 (i) (g) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961 In that case the petitioners son was employed as a clerk in the Panchayat service. The Court observed that it is true that sec. 23 (1) (g) uses wide expression as it covers not only shale or interest in any contract with the Panchayat but also in any work done by the order of the Panchayat or any employment with or under the Panchayat. It was further observed that the relevant clause would however be attracted when the petitioner himself directly or indirectly or through his partner has such share or interest. Merely because his son is in panchayat employment the father would not incur this disqualification on account of his said relationship. The point is also concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court in Gulab Yasin v. Sahebrao Yeshwantrao A. I. R. 1966 Supreme Court 1339 In view of the aforesaid two decisions it is clear to my mind that simply because the petitioners daughter is employed as a teacher in the Boys and girls school conducted by the Nagar Panchayat no disquali