SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(All) 1266

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S. K. SEN , G. P. MATHUR
MUDI - Appellant
Versus
STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, U.P., LUCKNOW - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 31877 Of 2000
Decided On : 09/27/2000

Advocates Appeared:
AMIT KRISHNAN, B.D.Mandhyan, RAVI KANT CHADHA

The finality of the electoral roll prepared in accordance with the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act and the Rules, and the limitations on challenging the electoral roll after its publication.

Headnote:

Election - U. P. Panchayat Raj Act - Section 9, Section 9-A, Rule 2, Rule 3, Rule 5, Rule 8, Rule 9, Rule 10, Rule 11, Rule 15, Rule 16, Rule 18, Rule 19, Rule 21-A - The judgment discusses the provisions of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act and the Rules made thereunder, emphasizing the finality of the electoral roll prepared in accordance with the Act and the Rules. It highlights the safeguards provided for the correction of the electoral roll and the limitations on challenging the electoral roll after its publication.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner contested the election for the office of Pradhan of a village, challenging the electoral roll's correctness and seeking various reliefs, including setting aside the election of the respondent and holding a fresh election.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing the finality of the electoral roll prepared in accordance with the Act and the Rules, and the limitations on challenging the electoral roll after its publication.

Issues: Challenge to the correctness of the electoral roll, finality of the electoral roll, limitations on challenging the electoral roll after its publication.

Ratio Decidendi: The electoral roll prepared in accordance with the Act and the Rules is final and immune from challenge after its publication. The Act provides safeguards for the correction of the electoral roll, and challenges to its correctness cannot be entertained after the election process has commenced.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed summarily at the admission stage.

G. P. MATHUR, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner contested election for the office of Pradhan of village Bhura, Tehsil Kairana, District Muzaffarnagar which was held on 23/06/2000. In the said election 4902 votes were cast out of which 308 votes were rejected as invalid. The petitioner secured 1597 votes while Rishipal, respondent No. (sic) secured 1752 votes and was accordingly declared to have been elected as pradhan. The present writ petition under Article of the Constitution has been filed praying for several reliefs including a writ of quo warranto asking respondent No. 4 to show his authority to hold the office of pradhan, a writ of mandamus for restraining respondent No. 4 from functioning as pradhan of the village, a writ of mandamus commanding State Election Commission and District Returning Officer to hold fresh election of the office of pradhan of village Bhura in accordance with the revised electoral rolls after deleting names of those who were wrongly included in the electoral roll of the gaon sabha. Further relief has been sought praying the writ of mandamus be issued commanding the State Election Commission and the District Returning Officer to delete the names of all those persons whose names have been mentioned in Annexures 2 to 4 of the writ petition. Though the relief claimed in the writ petition has not been couched in such a language but in effect the petitioner wants that the election of respondent No. 4 as pradhan be set aside and a fresh election be held.

( 2 ) SRI Ravi Kant, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that electoral roll of the gaon sabha, on the basis of which the election was held, was defective and fraudulent inasmuch as it contained names of large number of such persons who were either dead or were minors or were otherwise not eligible to vote in the election and, consequently, the result of the election had been materially affected and, therefore, the election of respondent No. 4 is liable to be set aside and a fresh election should be held after correcting the electorate roll.

( 3 ) IN order to examine the contention raised, it is necessary to notice the provisions of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the Rules made thereunder. Section 9 of the Act which deals with electoral roll for each territorial constituency was drastically amended by U. P. Act No. 9 of 1994. The relevant sub-sections of Section 9 of the Act which have a bearing on the controversy in hand are beingreproduced below :"9. Electoral roll for each territorial constituency.- (1) For each territorial constituency of a Gram Panchayat, an electoral roll shall be prepared, in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, under the superintendence, direction and control of the State Election Commission. (1-A) Subject to the superintendence, direction and control of the State Election Commission, the Mukhya Nirvachan Adhikari (Panchayat) shall supervise, and perform all functions relating to the preparation, revision and correction of the electoral rolls in the State in accordance with this Act and the rules made thereunder. (1-B ). . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) The electoral roll referred to in sub-section (1) shall be published in the prescribed manner and upon its publication it shall, subject to any alteration, addition or modification made in accordance with this Act and the rules made thereunder, be the electoral roll for that territorial constituency prepared in accordance with the provisions of this Act. (3) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (4), (5), (6) and (7) every person who has attained the age of 18 years on the first day of January of the year in which the electoral roll, is prepared or revised and who is ordinarily resident in the territorial constituency of a Gram Panchayat shall be entitled to be registered in the electoral roll for that territorial constituency. Explanation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top