1. - Petitioner Sheojilal, elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Gothara, Tehsil Hindoli, District Bundi has filed this writ petition inter-alia with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, the proceedings of Election Petition No.CM 4/2005, Prabhu Lal v. Sheojilal & Others pending in the Court of Additional District Judge No.2, Bundi may be adjudged as being without jurisdiction and the same may be ordered to be quashed and set aside, and the order dated 28.2.2005 passed by the District Judge, Bundi transferring the proceedings of that petition to the court of Additional District Judge no.2 and the order dated 6.8.2005 passed by the passed by the Additional District Judge rejecting his application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC; further order dated 11.8.2006 rejecting another application filed to the same effect, may be quashed and set aside and it be declared that the District Judge, Bundi had no authority to transfer the election petition filed by respondent no.3 from his court to that of the Additional District Judge no.2, Bundi.

2. Petitioner was declared elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Gothara, Tehsil Hindoli, District Bundi on 4.2.2005. The respondent no.3 filed election petition questioning the validity of his election in the Court of District Judge, Bundi on 25.2.2005 in accordance with the provisions of Section 43 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short 'the Act') and Rule 80 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 (for short 'the Rules') inter alia on the ground of corrupt practices were committed by the petitioner and that he made wrong declaration about the date of birth of his fourth child and that he was disqualified as per Section 26 of the Act to contest the election having had fourth child born into his family in the year 1996 after the cut off date i.e. 27.11.1995. The District Judge by order dated 28.2.2005 transferred the aforesaid election petition to the court of Additional District Judge no.2 who vide order dated 30.3.2005 issued notice to the petitioner as well as other non-petitioners. Petitioner filed reply to the election petition on 30.5.2005 accompanied by an application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC questioning jurisdiction of the Additional District Judge no.2, Bundi to hear and decide the aforesaid election petition. The matter remained pending for filing written statement/reply by various non-petitioners before the court of Additional District Judge. Petitioner in the meantime filed an application on 21.3.2006 seeking amendment in the reply/written statement. The learned Additional District Judge by order dated 29.3.2006 framed issues on which date another application was filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC. The learned Additional District Judge vide order dated 11.8.2006 dismissed that application and posted the matter for recording evidence of the election petitioner on 28.8.2006. Questioning the correctness of the aforesaid order apart from various other prayers extracted above, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. I have heard Shri K.K. Mehrishi, learned senior advocate for the petitioner and Shri N.K. Maloo, the learned counsel representing the respondent no.3 (original election petitioner).

4. Shri K.K. Mehrishi, the learned senior advocate argued that election of the sarpanch could be called in question only in accordance with the provisions of Section 43 of the Act in the prescribed manner by filing a petition before the District Judge having jurisdiction. According to proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 43 of the Act, the District Judge could for the reasons to be recorded in writing transfer such election petition for hearing and disposal to Civil Judge or Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Div.) subordinate to him. The District Judge, therefore, had no authority in law to transfer the election petition to the Additional Dist