Back
2015 Supreme(MP) 59
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rohit Arya, J.
Chandra Prakash Sharma v. The State Election
Commission, M.P. and others
Writ Petition No. 8123 of 2014 (Gwalior);
against order dated 18.12.2014 passed by Collector Bhind,
in Appeal Case No.6/2014-15; Decided on 29.1.2015
Anil Mishra for petitioner; M.P.S. Raghuvanshi, Additional Advocate General and Smt.Ami Prabal for respondents No.1 to 3; D. P. Singh for respondents No.4 to 36
Headnote:(1) Constitution of India -- Arts.226, 243-O and 329 -- scope of powers under Article 226 -- effect of constitutional bar of interference as envisaged under Article 243-O -- once election process commenced -- no interference called for -- besides -- power of Court granting stay of election process is no more res integra -- remedy -- is election petition after election. (1985)4 SCC 689, (2000)8 SCC 216, AIR 1952 SC 64, (1978)1 SCC 405 and (1996)3 SCC 416 discussed. [Paras 13 to 17
(2) Panchayat Nirvachan Rules, 1995 (M.P.) -- R.12(1) -- powers and duties of Registration Officer -- deletion of entry from voter list -- when illegal -- without notice to respondents No.4 to 36 -- without any inquiry -- their names deleted from voter list by undated order -- such order is illegal -- rightly set aside by appellate authority.
[Paras 21, 22, 28 & 33
(3) Panchayat Nirvachan Rules, 1995 (M.P.) -- R.12(1) -- words ‘summary inquiry’ and ‘decision’ -- means of -- it does not mean elaborate inquiry -- but principles of natural justice should be followed -- ‘decision’ -- it does not mean mere conclusion or non-reasoned order -- but conclusion must be by reasons. (1995)1 SCC 761 followed. [Paras 21 & 22
(4) Panchayat Nirvachan Rules, 1995 (M.P.) -- R.12(5) -- right to appeal -- any aggrieved person has right to appeal -- person aggrieved -- means of -- party to proceedings or person adversely affected -- is person aggrieved -- such person has right to appeal. [Paras 23 & 24
(5) Panchayat Nirvachan Rules, 1995 (M.P.) -- R.12(5) -- appeal under -- parties to -- application by intervener for impleading him -- he was not party in proceeding before Registration Officer -- he is not person aggrieved -- any person aggrieved must be interpreted in context of appellate proceedings -- his application rightly rejected by appellate authority. AIR 1961 SC 1312 followed. [Paras 23, 24 & 32
(6) Panchayat Nirvachan Rules, 1995 (M.P.) -- R.12(5) -- limitation for appeal -- starting point of -- no notice given to person adversely affected -- undated order -- order not communicated -- appeal filed within 5 days from date of knowledge -- though application for condonation of delay filed later on -- same shall relate back to date of filing of appeal -- starting point of limitation is date of knowledge -- appeal rightly treated to be within time. [Paras 25, 26, 29 & 30
(7) Limitation Act, 1963 -- Ss.5 and 29(2) -- M.P. Panchayat Nirvachan Rules, 1995 -- R.12(5) -- limitation for appeal -- 5 days prescribed -- appeal after 5 days from date of order -- but within 5 days from date of knowledge -- effect of provisions of section 29(2) of Act of 1963 -- appeal not barred by time -- no provision under rule 12(5) of Rules of 1995 about exclusion of section 5 of Limitation Act -- provisions of sections 4 to 24 will be applicable. 1970 JLJ 685(SC), (1996)5 SCC 342 and (2008)7 SCC 169 referred to. [Para 25
¼1½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuq-226] 243.k rFkk 329 & vuq-226 ds v/khu 'kfDr;ksa dh O;kfIr & gLr{ksi ds lkafo/kkfud otZu dk izHkko tSlk fd vuqPNsn 243.k ds vèkhu ifjdfYir gS & tSls gh fuokZpu izfØ;k izkjaHk dh xbZ & gLr{ksi visf{kr ugha & blds vfrfjDr & fuokZpu izfØ;k dks jksdus ds U;k;ky; dh 'kfDr vfu.khZr fo"k; ugha gS & mipkj & fuokZpu ds i'pkr~ fuokZpu ;kfpdk gSA ¼1985½4 ,l lh lh 689] ¼2000½8 ,l lh lh 216] , vkb vkj 1952 ,l lh 64] ¼1978½1 ,l lh lh 405 rFkk ¼1996½3 ,l lh lh 416 foosfprA ¼iSjk 13 ls 17
¼2½ iapk;r fuokZpu fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ & fu-12¼1½ & jftLVªhdj.k izkf/kdkjh dh 'kfDr;k¡ rFkk drZO; & ernkrk lwph ls izfof"V dk foyksiu & dc voS/k gS & izR;FkhZx.k Øekad 4 ls 36 dks lwpuk fn, fcuk & dksbZ tk¡p fd, fcuk & vfnukafdr vkns'k }kjk muds uke foyksfir fd, x, & ,slk vkns'k voS/k gS & vihy izkf/kdkjh }kjk lgh&gh vikLr fd;k x;kA ¼iSjk 21] 22] 28 ,oa 33
¼3½ iapk;r fuokZpu fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ & fu-12¼1½ & 'kCn ^laf{kIr tk¡p* vkSj ^fofu'p;* & ls vfHkizsr & blls foLr`r tkap djuk vfHkizsr ugha gksrk & fdarq uSlfxZd U;k; ds fl)kar dk ikyu fd;k tkuk pkfg, & ^fofu'p;* & blls ek= ifj.kke ;k dkj.k jfgr vkns'k gksuk vfHkizsr ugha gksrk & fdarq ifj.kke ldkj.k gksuk pkfg,A ¼1995½1 ,l lh lh 761 vuqlfjrA¼iSjk 21 ,oa 22
¼4½ iapk;r fuokZpu fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ & fu-12¼5½ & vihy dk vf/kdkj & dksbZ O;fFkr O;fDr dks vihy dk vf/kdkj gS & O;fFkr O;fDr & ls vfHkizsr & dk;Zokfg;ksa esa i{kdkj ;k izfrdwy :i ls izHkkfor O;fDr & O;fFkr O;fDr gS & ,sls O;fDr dks vihy dk vf/kdkj gSA¼iSjk 23 ,oa 24
¼5½ iapk;r fuokZpu fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ & fu-12¼5½ & mica/k ds v/khu vihy & ds i{kdkj & e/;{ksidrkZ }kjk mls i{kdkj cukus ds fy, vkosnu & og jftLVªhdj.k izkf/kdkjh ds le{k dk;Zokgh esa i{kdkj ugha & og O;fFkr O;fDr ugha & dksbZ O;fFkr O;fDr dk fuoZpu vihy dk;Zokfg;ksa ds lanHkZ esa fd;k tkuk pkfg, & vihy izkf/kdkjh }kjk mldk vkosnu lgh&gh [kkfjt fd;k x;kA , vkb vkj 1961 ,l lh 1312 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 23] 24 ,oa 32
¼6½ iapk;r fuokZpu fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ & fu-12¼5½ & vihy ds fy, ifjlhek & vkjaHk gksus dk fcanq & izfrdwy :i ls izHkkfor O;fDr dks lwpuk ugha nh xbZ & vkns'k vfnukafdr & vkns'k lalwfpr ugha & tkudkjh ds fnukad ls 5 fnol ds Hkhrj vihy izLrqr dh xbZ & ;|fi foyac ekQh ds fy, vkosnu ckn esa izLrqr fd;k x;k & og vihy izLrqr djus dh fiNyh rkjh[k ls laca) gksxk & ifjlhek dk vkjaHk fcanq tkudkjh dk fnukad gS & vihy lgh&gh le; lhek ds Hkhrj gksuk ekuh xbZA ¼iSjk 25] 26] 29 ,oa 30
¼7½ ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 & /kkjk 5 rFkk 29¼2½ & e-iz- iapk;r fuokZpu fu;e] 1995 & fu-12¼5½ & vihy ds fy, ifjlhek & 5 fnol fofgr & vkns'k ds fnukad ls 5 fnol i'pkr~ vihy & fdarq tkudkjh fnukad ls 5 fnol ds Hkhrj & 1963 ds vfèkfu;e dh /kkjk 29¼2½ ds mica/kksa dk izHkko & vihy le; oftZr ugha & 1995 ds fu;eksa ds fu;e 12¼5½ ds v/khu ifjlhek vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 5 ds viotZu ds fo"k; esa dksbZ mica/k ugha & /kkjk 4 ls 24 ds mica/k ykxw gksaxsA 1970 ts ,y ts 685 ¼mPpre U;k-½] ¼1996½5 ,l lh lh 342 rFkk ¼2008½7 ,l lh lh 169 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 25
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has questioned legality, validity and propriety of impugned order dated 18.12.2014 passed by the Collector/appellate authority, District Bhind setting aside undated order passed by the Registration Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Ater District Bhind in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under rule 12(5) of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Nirvachan Niyam, 1995 (hereinafter referred to Nirvachan Rules,1995).
2. Facts necessary for disposal of this petition are to the effect that respondents’ No.4 to 36 were in the voters’ list issued under rule 10 of the Election Rules,1995 in respect of Gram Panchayat, Jarri, Janpad Panchayat, Ater District Bhind uptill now and acted upon in recently held parliamentary elections. Thereafter, objections were filed for deletion of their names from the voters’ list. The Registration Officer without notice to the aforesaid respondents’ No.4 to 36 and without enquiry, much less, summary enquiry has deleted their names from the voters’ list by an undated order. Thereafter, final voters list was published. Respondents’ No.4 to 36 having come to know about the order passed by the Registration Officer on 3.12.2014 have filed an appeal on 8.12.2014. The order passed by the Registration Officer has been challenged inter alia on the ground that their names appearing in the voters’ list of Gram Panchayat,Jaari, Janpad Panchayat Ater, District Bhind uptill nowand but without any notice and opportunity of hearing, the Registration Officer has deleted their names from the voters’ list. No enquiry was held and the same is contrary to the mandate contained under rule 12(1) of the Nirvachan Rules,1995. Further, the order by which their names were deleted is an undated order. The Registration Officer has not mentioned even the date of receiving the objections and no date was given for appearance. That is the sole basis for deleting their names from the voters’ list. It was, therefore, submitted that the Registration Officer had acted in highhanded manner and in flagrant violation of statutory provisions contained in rule 12 of the Nirvachan Rules,1995. As the order was undated, the same was not in the knowledge of the respondents No.4 to 36. However, no sooner, they acquired knowledge of the order on 3.12.2014, appeal was filed before the Collector, i.e., within 5 days from the date of acquisition of knowledge. The aforesaid fact of acquisition of knowledge of the order on 3.12.2014 was explained in the application filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act on 10.12.2014 by the respondents’ No.4 to 36. With the aforesaid submissions, it was submitted that the appeal was filed within limitation and the order passed by the Registration Officer was patently illegal and unsustainable in the eye of law. The petitioner was not party before the Registration Officer, however, filed an application for permission to participate in the appellate proceedings before the appellate authority. The appellate authority has observed that the petitioner has not filed any objection before the Registration Officer for deletion of names of the respondents’ No.4 to 36. There was nothing on record to demonstrate and establish that the petitioner could be said to be party and, therefore, turned down the application of the petitioner to participate in the appellate proceedings. Though, the appellate authority has recorded contentions of the petitioner related to preliminary objection as regards limitation on the ground that the voters’ list was finalized on 24.10.2014 and since the appeal was not filed within the prescribed period under rule 12(5) of Nirvachan Rules,1995, therefore, the appeal was barred by time and no interference was warranted. The appellate authority on perusal of the original record has found that no proceedings whatsoever were initiated by the Registration Officer before deletion of names of respondents’ No.4 to 36 from the voters’ list of
