A candidate's election cannot be invalidated for non-disclosure of liabilities unless it is shown to materially affect the election result, as established under the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act.

JUDGMENT :

R.K. PATTANAIK, J.

1. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner assailing the correctness, legality and judicial propriety of the impugned judgment dated 7^th February, 2024 as at Annexure-4 passed in connection with F.A.O. No.16 of 2023 by the learned Additional District Judge, Kamakhyanagar confirming the decision in Election Misc. Case No.07 of 2022 dated 30^th November, 2023 of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kamakhyanagar as per Annexure-3, whereby, her election as Sarapanch of Kankadahad Gram Panchayat has been declared void in view of Section 25 (1)(w) of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on the grounds inter alia that such declaration is not legally tenable and hence, liable to be interfered with and set aside in the interest of justice.

2. In fact, opposite party No.1 filed the election petition for declaring the election of the petitioner as invalid in view of Section 25 (1)(w) of the Act of filing a false affidavit along with the nomination paper thereby not disclosing the liabilities incurred by her inviting disqualification under the provisions of the Act in terms thereof and considering the same, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kamakhyanagar declared it as void vide Annexure-3. As against the above decision, the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned court below and it was disposed of confirming the disqualification by judgment (Annexure-4) dated 7^th February, 2024 with a conclusion that such disqualification shall have to be in accordance with Section 39 of the Act. Being aggrieved of, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing the writ petition on the grounds, such as, non-disclosure does not vitiate the election, inasmuch as, declaration of liability incurred by way of a loan is not statutorily mandated and that apart, there is nothing on record to prove and establish that for not having disclosed such information, the result of the election has been materially affected and therefore, the conclusion of the learned courts below vide Annexure-3 & 4 is grossly erroneous and hence, liable to be quashed.

3. Heard Mr. Samal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Behera, learned counsel for opposite party No.1 and Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State.

4. The State Election Commissioner issued notification for Panchayat election scheduled to be held in the month of February, 2022 and in that, the petitioner, opposite party No.1 and three other candidates filed nomination for the post of Sarpanch of the concerned GP before opposite party No.2. According to opposite party No.1, an objection was raised before opposite party No.2 at the time of scrutiny of the nomination papers on 22^nd January, 2022 that the petitioner has outstanding loan dues payable and the same has not been disclosed, rather concealed, hence for such non-disclosure in the affidavit, she invites disqualification under Section 25 (1)(w) of the Act and as such, it should not be accepted as a valid nomination.

5. As per the pleading on record, the petitioner secured 1660 votes, whereas, opposite party No.1 received 1579 votes and as per opposite party No.1, in view of the disqualification under Section 25 (1)(w) of the Act, opposite party No.2 could not have notified the election of the petitioner as the returned candidate on 2^nd March, 2022. Considering the challenge to the election of the petitioner, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kamakhyanagar received evidence from both the sides. The election petitioner, namely, opposite party No.1 examined three witne