IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Indrajit Mahanty, Raghubir Dash, JJ.
SMT. KIRANBALA ROUT - APPELLANT
Versus
SMT. RASNAMAYEE ROY - RESPONDENT
Writ Appeal No. 5 of 2013
Decided On : 10-02-2016
Orissa Gram Panchayats Act - Election Dispute - Section 31
Fact of the Case:
The appellant contested for the post of Sarpanch of Kalamatia Gram Panchayat and the respondent challenged the election alleging disqualification. The election petition was filed without the necessary deposit of security for costs as required under Section 31 of the Orissa Gram Panchayats Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the election petition and payment of security deposit were made within the period of limitation, thus there was substantial compliance of Section 31 of the Orissa Grama Panchayats Act.
Issues: Interpretation of Section 31 of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, substantial compliance with the statutory requirements, and the exercise of discretion by the Election Tribunal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the filing of the election petition and the deposit of security within the period of limitation constituted substantial compliance with Section 31. The court also emphasized the discretion vested in the Election Tribunal to condone delay as per the proviso to Section 31.
Final Decision: The Writ Appeal was dismissed as the court found no error of law in the decision of the learned Single Judge.
JUDGMENT :
I. Mahanty, J. - In the present appeal, the appellant has sought to assail the judgment dated 6.12.2012 passed in W.P.C. No. 20648 of 2012 whereby the learned Single Judge upheld the order dated 24.9.2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Jajpur in Election Misc. Case No. 6 of 2012. By the said order, the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) had rejected the appellant?s petition under Section 31 of the Orissa Gram Panchayats Act, 1965.
2. The present case in a nutshell is that, the appellant and the respondent both contested for the post of Sarpanch of Kalamatia Gram Panchayat under Bari Block in the district of Jajpur in the year 2012 Gram Panchayat election. The appellant being the successful candidate, the respondent sought to challenge the appellant?s election by filing Election Misc. Case No. 6 of 2012 before the Election Tribunal, Jajpur i.e. the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Jajpur alleging that the appellant was disqualified to hold the post of Sarpanch as she had given birth to three children after the year 1995. Admittedly, the election result was declared on 21.2.2012 and election petition was presented on 2.3.2012. It is averred that the election petition was filed without the necessary deposit of security for costs as required under Section 31 of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act and the said security towards cost was deposited by way of challan on 5.3.2012 i.e. after three days of filing of the election petition.
3. It was contended by the appellant that this delay of three days in depositing the security money was not in consonance with Section 31 of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act and accordingly, she filed election petition before the Election Tribunal seeking dismissal of the election petition. Being unsuccessful before the election Tribunal, W.P.(C) No. 20648 of 2012 came to be filed before this Court and the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 6.12.2012. Consequently, the present challenge in the present Writ Appeal.
4. The learned Single Judge has dealt with in detail every contention advanced by the appellant as well as the respondent and came to conclude as follows:
"22. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that since the election petition was presented on 2.3.2012 without security deposit, which was paid on 5.3.2012 i.e. after three days of the filing of the election petition and both filing of election petition and payment of security deposit were made within the period of limitation, there is substantial compliance of Section 31 of the Orissa Grama Panchayats Act and therefore, the Election Tribunal is justified to entertain the election petition and reject the objection filed by the returned candidate."
5. The essential challenge in the present appeal pertains to interpretation of Section 31 of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act which reads as follows:
31. Presentation of petitions- (1) The petition shall be presented on one or more of the grounds specified in Section 39 before the [Civil Judge (Junior Division)] having jurisdiction over the place at which the office of the Grama Sasan is situated together with a deposit of such amount, if any, as may be prescribed in that behalf as security for costs within fifteen days after the date on which the name of the person elected is published under Section 15:
Provided that if the office of the [Civil Judge (Junior Division) is closed on the last day of the period of limitation as aforesaid the petition may be presented on the next day on which such office is open:
Provided further that if the petitioner satisfies the [Civil Judge (Junior Division)] that sufficient cause existed for the failure to present the petition within the period aforesaid the (Civil Judge (Junior Division)] may in his discretion condone such failure.
(2) No candidate who has been elected to be a member, Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch of a Grama Panchayat shall be debarred from holding office as such member. Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch merely by
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.