BHANDARI, J.—This is a special appeal under sec. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance against the judgment of a learned single Judge in a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution filed by Lalooram who was member of the Panchayat Samiti, Bikaner for a declaration that Kumari Chandrakala had ceased to hold the office of Pradhan and member of Panchayat Samiti Bikaner as well as that of Sarpanch, Panchayat, Kalasar as she failed to take the oath prescribed under sub-sec. (1) of sec. 72 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1959 (Act No. 37 of 1959, hereinafter called the Act) within the time prescribed in sub-sec. (2) of that section or under sec. 72-A thereof.

2. Kumari Chandra Kala was elected as member of the Gram Panchayat Kalasar within the jurisdiction of Panchayat Samiti, Bikaner, and by virtue of sec. 3 of the Act she became an ex-officio member of the Panchayat Samiti, Bikaner. On 30th January, 1965, she was elected as Pradhan of that Panchayat Samiti. She took the oath contained in Ex. 1 before Shri K.R. Goyal on 30th January, 1965. She further took oaths in the forms contained in Exs. 2 and 3 on the 18th August, 1965, before Mr. K. G. Raj who is described as Collector, Bikaner, in these exhibits. The contentions of the respondent Lalooram in his writ petition were that the form of oath contained in Ex. 1 taken by the petitioner in the meeting of the Panchayat Samiti held on 30th January, 1965, was not in accordance with sub-sec. (1) of sec. 72 of the Act and that the appellant had not taken any oaths before the Collector within the time prescribed in sec. 72-A as the oaths contained in Exs. 2 and 3 were not taken before the Collector but were taken before the Assistant Collector and were therefore not precise compliance with the provisions of sec. 72-A of the Act. It was urged that all the three oaths taken by the petitioner being not in accordance with law, were not valid and the appellant ceased to be a member of the Panchayat Samiti in accordance with the provisions of sub-sec. (2) of sec. 72. It was further urged that as she ceased to be a member of the Panchayat Samiti, she ipso facto ceased to be Pradhan and she also ceased to be the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Kalasar. It was, therefore, prayed that a writ in the nature of quo warranto or any other writ, direction or order may be issued against the appellant restraining her from functioning in any of these capacities, in other words, for vacating these offices forthwith.

3. The appellant appeared in the initial stage of the proceeding to contest the stay application filed along with the writ petition in which she stated that the oath Ex. 1 was in the prescribed form and even if there was some necessary defect, there was substantial compliance of the law. She further urged that as a matter of abundant caution, she had taken oaths contained in Exs. 2 and 3 on 18th August, 1965, within one month of the publication of the Rajasthan Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads ( Second Amendment ) Act, 1965. She did not put in appearance thereafter and the writ petition was heard ex parte by the learned single Judge. The learned Judge held that the appellant was elected as Pradhan in the meeting convened for that purpose on 30th January, 1965, which was presided over by Mr. K. R. Goyal, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bikaner, and that after being elected as Pradhan, she took oath of office of the Pradhan before Mr. K. R. Goyal; but as no such oath was prescribed and she did not take oath as a member of the Panchayat Samiti, the oath taken by her on 30th January, 1965 was of no avail. He further held that the oaths taken by her on the 18th August, 1965, were taken before Mr. K.G. Raj who described himself as Collector, Bikaner, but was not the Collector and was only an Assistant Collector performing the routine duties of the Collector, and these oaths having been not taken before the Collector did not avail. Taking this view of the oaths, he allow

Click Here to Read the rest of this document