2012 Supreme(Ori) 319
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
B.N. MAHAPATRA, J.
Surubali Deep - Petitioner
Versus
Jamuna Naik - Opp. Parties
W.P.(C) No. 18186 of 2012
Decided on : 19.10.2012
For Petitioner: M/s. H.S. Mishra, A.K. Mishra, A.S. Behera & R. Dash
For Opp. Parties : Mr. Jagabandhu Sahu (for Caveator-O.P. No.1)
Non-mention of relevant provision of law in a petition or mention of a wrong provision of law cannot be a ground to reject the petition. The procedure for trial of election petition is different from that of a Civil Suit.
Headnote:
Election Tribunal - Panchayat Samiti Act - Section 44-B, Section 45-V - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of Section 44-B and Section 45-V of the Panchayat Samiti Act. It highlighted the legal principle that non-mention of relevant provision of law in a petition or mention of a wrong provision of law in a petition cannot be a ground to reject the petition. The court also emphasized that the trial of election petition is different from the trial in a Civil Suit, and the procedure provided for trial of Civil Suit under CPC is not entirely applicable to the trial of the election petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition to declare the election of the respondent void, alleging violation of Section 45-V of Panchayat Samiti Act. The Election Tribunal allowed the petition and directed the Headmasters to produce admission registers. The petitioner challenged this order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the non-mention of relevant provision of law in a petition or mention of a wrong provision of law cannot be a ground to reject the petition. It also held that the procedure for trial of election petition is different from that of a Civil Suit.
Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of the order passed by the Election Tribunal, the admissibility of the petition, and the applicability of procedural rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that non-mention of relevant provision of law in a petition or mention of a wrong provision of law cannot be a ground to reject the petition. It also clarified that the procedure for trial of election petition is different from that of a Civil Suit.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the decision of the Election Tribunal.
JUDGMENT
B.N. Mahapatra, J.
1. Challenge has been made to the order dated 12.09.2012 passed under Annexure-6 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bolangir (hereinafter referred to as ‘Election Tribunal’) in ELP No.21 of 2012 in which the Election Tribunal has allowed the petition dated 06.09.2012 filed by the Election Petitioner with a prayer to direct the Headmaster of Government High School, Bahaler and Headmaster of Panchayat High School, Bandhapada to produce the admission register of Prasanna Deep, Panchanana Deep and Brajaswari Deep.
2. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner files further affidavit in Court inter alia stating therein that opp. party no.1 has filed petition dated 24.8.2012 on 6.9.2012 in I.A. (Elec. Misc.) Case No.21 of 2012 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bolangir. The learned Court below has decided Annexure-3 taking into consideration of filing of petition on 6.9.2012. The opp. party no.1 has not filed any petition other than the Annexure-3 with the prayer to direct the Headmaster to produce the Admission Register of the persons concerned.
Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for opp. party no.1 files a Memo enclosing the certified copy of the petition dated 24.8.2012 filed before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bolangir on 6.9.2012.
In view of the above, the petition dated 24.8.2012 filed by the election petitioner is the same petition which the Election Tribunal describes as petition dated 6.9.2012 in its order, as the petition dated 24.8.2012 was filed before it on 6.9.2012.
3. Petitioner’s case in a nutshell is that opposite party No.1 filed Election Petition under Section 44-B of the Panchayat Samiti Act before the Election Tribunal bearing Election Misc. Case No.21/2012 to declare the election of the petitioner void/invalid and to declare the election petitioner as elected Panchayat Samiti member of the Village Bhubel, Puintala Block on the ground that the petitioner has got more than two children in violation of Section 45-V of Panchayat Samiti Act after the cut off date with other grounds. On receiving the notice, the petitioner appeared and filed objection in detail and prayed to dismiss the Election case. However, the Trial Court while proceeding with hearing of the case the election petitioner filed a petition on 24.08.2012 (Annexure-3) with a prayer to direct the Headmaster of Government High School, Bhaler and Headmaster of Panchayat High School, Bandhpada to produce admission register in respect of persons mentioned in the petition on the ground that she has to prove her case on the basis of the certificate granted by the Headmaster of two Schools. The election-petitioner filed her objection under Annexure-4 stating that the petition under Annexure-3 is not legally maintainable; the petitioner does not disclose the month and year of admission; petition is vague and the same cannot be entertained. Despite the same, the Election Tribunal illegally passed the impugned order dated 12.09.2012 and allowed the petition dated 24.08.2012 filed by the election-petitioner and rejected the objection petition filed by the present petitioner.
4. Mr. Himansu Sekhar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Court can only consider a petition under a particular law and whether within the scope and ambit of said provisions of law any order can be passed. The election-petitioner in the petition under Annexure-3 having not mentioned the provisions of law under which application has been filed the said petition is not maintainable. Opposite party No.1, the election-petitioner deposed in her evidence while examined herself as PW-1 that the alleged certificates relate to the date of birth of her children. The Election Tribunal in a most illegal manner without applying judicial mind mechanically allowed the petition filed by the election-petitioner under Annexure-3 and directed the Headmaster of Government High School, Bhaler and Headmaster of Panchayat High School, Bandhap