The mandatory requirement of security deposit for election petitions must be complied with at the time of filing, and failure to do so results in dismissal, as affirmed by precedent.

ORDER

Rusia, -- J. 1. Appellant/petitioner has filed this Writ Appeal under section 2 (1) of M.P. Uchcha Nayayalaya (Khand Nyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 challenging the order dated 1.7.2024 (Annexure A-1) whereby the Writ Court has dismissed the Writ Petition No.1863/2024 and upheld the impugned order dated 15.1.2024 passed by respondent No.1/the Sub-Divisional Officer, Lahar, District Bhind dismissing the application filed by appellant/petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

2. The facts of the case in short are as under :--

(i) The petitioner and respondents No.2 to 6 contested the election for the post of the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Sikri Jagir, Janpad Panchayat Lahar, Tehsil Mihona, District Bhind. The Petitioner secured 425 votes and was declared as Sarpanch on 14.7.2022. The respondent No.2 secured 407 votes and lost.

(ii) Respondent No.2 filed an Election Petition under section 122 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Panchayat Act’) before the Specified Officer challenging the election of petitioner/appellant. The Election Petition was presented on 10.8.2022 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Lahar District Bhind. Respondent No.2 sought permission to deposit Rs.500/- as a security deposit amount before the Tehsildar, Lahar, District Bhind. The Specified Officer registered the case and directed the petitioner to submit the receipt of a deposit of the security amount of Rs.500/-. Notices were directed to be issued to nonapplicants therein by submitting an adequate number of copies. The petitioner deposited Rs.500/- on 10.8.2022 before the Tehsildar and submitted the receipt before the Sub-divisional Officer on the same day as the date of filing of the Election Petition. After receipt of the notice, the appellant/petitioner appeared and sought time to file a reply.

(iii) The Petitioner/appellant filed an application dated 31.10.2022 under rule 8 of the M.P. Panchayats (Election Petitions, Corrupt Practices and Disqualification for Membership) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Election Petition Rules ‘) by stating that the election petitioner did not deposit Rs.500/- i.e. the security amount, at the time of presentation of the Election Petition; hence, the same is liable to be dismissed. The said application was opposed by the Election Petitioner and vide order dated 16.1.2023, the said application was dismissed by the Specified Officer.

(iv) The petitioner did not challenge the aforesaid order by way of the writ petition and filed another application that the affidavit is not verified by the Oath Commissioner; therefore, in the absence of a valid affidavit, the Election Petition is liable to be dismissed. The said application was also dismissed vide order dated 17.5.2023. Despite that the reply was not filed and the petitioner/appellant filed WP No.12380/2023 before this Court but vide order dated 22.11.2023, the Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court. Thereafter, the Specified Officer framed the issue on 18.12.2023 and fixed the case for evidence.

(v) Thereafter, the petitioner/appellant filed another application under Order 7 rule 11 CPC on 8.1.2024 seeking dismissal of the Election Petition due to noncompliance with the provisions of Rule 7 of the Election Petition Rules. The said application was opposed by respondent No.2 and vide impugned order dated 15.1.2024, the Specified Officer dismissed the said application.

(vi) The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.1863/2024 challenging the impugned order dated 15.1.2024. Vide order dated 5.2.2024, by relying on the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Si