The court ruled that a candidate's manipulation of age to meet eligibility for election constitutes grounds for disqualification under the Jharkhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2001.

Order :

RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

2. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings of Election Petition No. 01/2022-23 pending before the respondent No. 3. The petitioner has also prayed for stay of the entire proceedings of Election Petition No. 01/2022-23. Consequent to an amendment application being I.A. 3194 of 2023 having been allowed by this Court vide an order dated 27.04.2023,the petitioner has mounted a challenge to the order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the respondent No. 3 in Election Petition No. 01/2022-23 by virtue of which election of the petitioner as Mukhiya in Gram Panchayat Dubey, Marhatiya has been cancelled.

3. The factual matrix in brief is that the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 were the contesting candidates in the election of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Dubey, Marhatiya which is reserved for female candidates. The petitioner claims that she possesses all the requisite qualification essential for being elected as a Mukhiya. The petitioner attained success in the elections and was declared the elected Mukhiya and accordingly she is discharging her duties as Mukhiya. The impediment to her functioning as a Mukhiya came in the form of Election Petition No. 01/2022-23 preferred by the respondent No. 4 challenging the election on the ground of non- eligibility of the petitioner to contest the said election. Vide order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the respondent No. 3 in Election Petition No. 01/2022- 23, the election of the petitioner to the post of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Dubey, Marhatiya was cancelled.

4. Advancing his arguments, Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent No. 3 does not have the jurisdiction to decide the issue of eligibility of the candidate as per the JHARKHAND PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT , 2001 and the same can only be challenged before the competent court having jurisdiction. It has been submitted that there has been no suppression on the part of the petitioner and all the documents indicating her age and qualification had been brought to the notice of the concerned authority to validate the entries made by the petitioner in the nomination form.

5. Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 4 has submitted that the petitioner had suppressed her real age and had fraudulently got herself elected as a Mukhiya. The minimum prescribed age for contesting the elections is 21 years and the petitioner was less than 21 years when she had filled up the nomination form. According to Mr. Rahul Kumar vague statement was given about the educational qualification in the nomination form and in fact it is manifest that the petitioner had committed a fraud in contesting the elections of Mukhiya.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the question of jurisdiction of the respondent No. 3 in deciding the eligibility of the petitioner in contesting the elections to the post of Mukhiya. In this contest reference may be made to Section 151 of the JHARKHAND PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT , 2001 which reads as follows:

“ Section 151 Election Petition :- (1) An election held under this Act shall be called in question only by filing a petition in the prescribed manner and not otherwise, to –

(i) The sub divisional officer in matters of a Gram Panchayat;

(ii) The District magistrate/ Deputy Commissioner in matters of a Panchayat Samiti; and (iii) The Divisional Commissioner in matters of a Zila Parishad.

(2) No such petition shall be entertained unless it is filed within a period of thirty days from the date on which the election in question was notified.

(3) Such petition shall be exami