Mr. Alok Sharma, J.

1. This petition has been filed against the judgment dated 21-9-2016 passed by the Senior Civil Judge Kaman (Bharatpur), where under the election petition filed by the respondent-election petitioner (hereinafter the EP’) challenging the election of the petitioner-returned candidate (hereinafter ‘the RC’) was allowed and election of the RC as Sarpanch of village Ghatmika, Panchayat Samiti Pahari District Bharatpur has been set aside.

2. Election of the RC to the post of Sarpanch of village Ghatmika, Panchayat Samiti Pahari District Bharatpur was called in question under Section 43 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter ‘the Act of 1994’) read with Rule 80 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter ‘the Rules of 1994’) by the EP inter alia alleging that the RC’s documents regarding his educational qualification to contest election for the post of Sarpanch were forged and fabricated and that the Returning Officer did not critically check the documents of the RC and illegally accepted his nomination form.

3. On notice on the election petition, the RC obviously filed reply of denial stating that he was eligible to contest the election. It was his case that he passed the 8th class in 1969 from Ambedkar Junior School Raya Road Priti Vihar Mathura. It was also stated that as per the transfer certificate issued by the school his date of birth was 20-7-1955, which the EP has wrongly mentioned as 14-8-1948. It was stated that since the original mark-sheet and transfer certificate were lost, he had obtained a duplicate thereof and enclosed them with the nomination papers. As an additional defence to the election petition, it was stated that Returning Officer and District Election Officer not being impleaded as parties, the election petition be dismissed for non joinder of necessary parties.

Based on the pleadings, the trial Court framed the following issues:-

1- vk;k xSj;kph ‘kkSdr vkBoha d{kk mrh.kZ ugha gksus ls xzke iapk;r ?kkVehdk esa ljiap in gsrq fnuakd 18-01-2006 dks lEiUu gq, pquko esa ljiap ij gsrq izR;k’kh ds :i esa v;ksX; Fkk\

;kph

2- vk;k xSj;kph us mDr pquko esa ljiap in gsrq uke funsZ’ku i= ds lkFk tks ‘kS{kf.kd nLrkost izLrqr fd;s gSa os QthZ gS\

;kph

3- vk;k xSjk;ph us okMZ la- 4 ds iap in gsrq uke funsZ’ku izLrqr fd;k x;k Fkk ijUrq fjVfuax vf/kdkjh us lkt dj fcuk ukekadu i= dh ijh{kk fd;s mls ljiap in dk izR;k’kh cuk fy;k\

;kph

4- vk;k ;kph us pquko ;kfpdk ds izR;sd i`”B dk i`”Bkadu o izek.khdj.k vkSj mUoku fu;ekuqlkj ugha fd;k gS blfy, ;kfpdk dkfcys [kkfjt gS\

xSj;kph

5- vk;k ;kph us ;kfpdk esa fjVfuax vf/kdkjh o fuokZpu vf/kdkjh dks i{kdkj ugha cuk;k ftlds vHkko esa ;kfpdk dkfcys [kkfjt gS] xSj;kph\

6- vuqrks”k\

4. In support of the election petition, the EP examined himself as PW-1, Arjan PW-2, and Girraj Singh PW-3 and exhibited 14 documents. The RC examined himself as DW-1, Uttamchand Dw- 2, Noor Mohammad DW-3, Rahim Khan DW-4 and Bhim Singh DW-5 and exhibited one document.

5. The trial Court considered issues No.1&2 together and concluded that the Transfer Certificate (Ex.8) and mark-sheet (Ex.9) produced before the Returning Officer by the RC as proof of his educational qualification of having passed class VIII for contesting the election to the post of Sarpanch were forged. This conclusion of the trial Court was based on the critical examination of the evidence of one PW.3 Girraj Singh, Division Education Officer Raya and the enquiry report (Ex.13) to this effect duly exhibited, where-from it was established that in the years 1966-1969 the Ambedkar Junior School Raya Road Priti Bihar Mathura was not in existence. The RC’s certificate and mark-sheet so claiming (Ex.9 and Ex.8 respectively) were obviously forged and fabricated and he was thus not qualified on the educational requirement of class VIII pass to contest the election to the post of Sarpanch. The trial Court however found no collusion of the Returning Officer in the RC’s nomination form being accepted as