The interpretation of the phrase 'Read and Write Oriya' under Section 11(b) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act, 1964 is based on the standard required for a Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch of a Grama Panchayat.

JUDGMENT :

M.M. Das, J. - The Petitioner was declared elected as Sarpanch of Kayan Grama Panchayat on 22.2.2007. The opp. party No. 1 filed Election Misc. Case No. 37 of 2007 challenging the election of the Petitioner before the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division)-cum-Election Tribunal, Jajpur. The sole ground taken in the election petition was that the Petitioner was not eligible to contest the election to the post of Sarpanch, she being unable to read and write Oriya, which is one of the qualification clauses, as prescribed in Section 11(b) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act'). The Petitioner after appearing in the said election dispute filed a written statement, inter alia, denying the allegations made by the opp. party No. 1. The learned Election Tribunal framed as many as five issues and issue No. 3 was framed with regard to the question as to whether the Petitioner, on the date of filing of the nomination paper, was able to read and write Oriya.

2. During the course of hearing, the Petitioner exhibited the book "CHHABILA BARNOBODH" as Ext. A and a job card issued by her under her signature as Ext. B. The Petitioner was examined as O.P.W.1 in the Election Misc. Case. In her evidence, she stated that she is able to read and write Oriya. In the examination-in-chief, she read some pages of "CHHABILA BARNOBODH" vide Ext. A and also stated that she was reading in CHATA SALI during her childhood. As, in the cross-examination, she stated that she can read Orissa Grama Panchayat Act in Oriya, she was asked to read Sections 147 and 148 of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act (Oriya Edition). The learned Election Tribunal recorded what she read in verbatim and found that it contains several mistakes. In the crossexamination, she was asked by the learned Counsel for the election Petitioner to write in Oriya. The words dictated by him are, i.e., "SMRUTISIGNDHA SANDHIBIGRHA", "SAURASTRA DESA RA EKA SAMBRUDHA ANCHAL", 'DOCTOR GARDEN BROWN BARTAMANA BRITISH PRADHAN MANTRI', TRUPTIMAYEE PANIGRAHI. SAMPRATI CHICKEN GUNIA EKA MARATMAKA ROGA', "AHEE GHATANA BHARATRA DRUSTI, NASA, KARNA, BISE SANGYA MANAKU UDBIGHNA KARICHI". The learned Election Tribunal finding that there are number of mistakes in the writing of the Petitioner (opp. party No. 1 in the court below) to the dictation of the learned Counsel for the election Petitioner (opp. party No. 1 herein), concluded that the Petitioner did not know how to read and write Oriya and, therefore, was not eligible to contest the election.

3. An appeal was carried by the Petitioner against the judgment of the learned Election Tribunal before the learned District Judge, Cuttack in Election Appeal No. 11 of 2008. The learned District Judge concluding that the specimen writings of the Appellant (Petitioner herein) taken in presence Labangalata Mallick v. Mandakini Mallick (M.M. DAS, J.) of the Presiding Officer do not make any sense at all, confirmed the judgment passed by the learned Election Tribunal.

4. Mr. Mishra, learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that it is a well settled principle of law that to avoid an election, it is necessary to lead cogent evidence in support of the charge and an election cannot be set aside on presumption, surmises or conjectures. Clear and cogent proof in support of the allegation is essential (See Uma Ballava Rath v. Moheswar Mohanty and Ors. 88 (1999) CLT 329 He further contended that the portions dictated to the Petitioner in court contained complex sentences and "YUKTAKHYARA" which even a student having minor qualification in Oriya could not have correctly written and in all probability would have committed mistakes. He also relied upon the judgment dated 22.6.2009 of this Court rendered in W.P. (C) No. 19747 of 2008 Kalabati Jena v. Dhaneswar Jena and three Ors.) in support of his contention that this Court has clearly laid down that when there is no minimum standard prescribed in the Grama Panchayat Act, the disqualification clause cannot