The interpretation of the age requirement under Section 11(b) of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, 1964, and the relevance of the Voter Identity Card in determining the petitioner's eligibility.

JUDGMENT :

M.M. Das, J. - Gram Panchayat elections in the State of Orissa were held in the month of February, 2007. The date of filing of nomination papers wasfixed as 9th January, 2007. The Petitioner as well as the opposite party No. 3 filed their nomination papers for contesting in the election to the post of Sarpanch of Ekasingi Gram Panchayat in the District of Ganjam. The nomination papers were scrutinized and accepted. The result of the election was published on 22.02.2007 declaring the Petitioner as the elected Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat.

2. On the date of filing of the nomination paper, the opposite party No. 3 filed an objection before the Election Officer stating therein that the nomination paper filed by the Petitioner should be rejected on the ground that he has not attained the age of 21 years as mandatorily required u/s 11(b) of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, 1964. However, the Election Officer accepted the nomination paper of the Petitioner. Voting was held on 13.02.2007. The Petitioner secured 609 votes and the opposite party No. 3 secured 561 votes out of the valid votes cast. The opposite party No. 3 thereafter filed a election dispute before the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Berhampur registered as Election Petition No. 2 of 2007 seeking declaration of the election of the Petitioner as void and further to declare the opposite party No. 3 as Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat. The Petitioner filed his show cause/written statement on receiving the show cause notice in the election Misc. Case. The opposite party No. 3 in support of his case relied upon the certificate granted to the Petitioner by the Board of Secondary Education, Orissa in the High School Certificate Examination for proving his date of birth to be 25.05.1986 and, as such, the Petitioner was 20 years 7 months 15 days old on the date of filing of the nomination paper.

3. The Petitioner, on the other hand, claimed that he was born on 08.07.1984 and was admitted in a Project Upper Primary School on 08.11.1989. While continuing his studies in Class-II, he left the school on 30.04.1992 and was admitted in a school at Bhubaneswar. As the Petitioner did not fair well at Bhubaneswar, he was again brought back to village Parapentho and was admitted in Biswanathpur Chakka Upper Primary School in Class-III on 10.07.1993 by mentioning his date of birth as 03.05.1985 where he continued for sometime and was admitted in some other school and completed Class-VII. Ultimately he was admitted in Costal Development Technical Bidyamandir, Biswanathpur wherefrom he completed his High School Examination. The Petitioner further stated in the written statement that his date of birth cannot be possible after 21.12.1984 as his mother has undergone a family planning operation in the Public Health Centre at Keluha Palli vide entry No. 300 dated 21.12.1984 and, therefore, the date of birth as entered in the First Admission Register at the Project Primary School is his correct date of birtsh.

4. The Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 in this writ petition, who are the State and the Block Development Officer-cum-Election Officer also filed a written statement denying the allegations made in the election petition and, inter alia, stating that the nomination paper was thoroughly scrutinized and the objection petition was rejected with the observation that the authorities have no power to adjudicate the matter within a short span of time and also denied the allegation with regard to unfair practice, i.e, influencing the opposite party No. 2 in terms of money to accept the nomination paper. The voter list on the basis of which the Election Officer held the Petitioner to be eligible to contest the election was stated to have been prepared in accordance with law and no objection was raised during preparation of the same.

5. The vital issue framed by the Election Tribunal was as to whether the opposite party No. 1 attained the age of 21 years on the date of filing of the nomination. Par