Submission of a caste certificate issued by the competent state authority is mandatory for reserved category candidates under amended election rules; such a requirement cannot be waived or substituted by an affidavit unless explicitly provided for in the governing rules.

ORDER :

This petition has been filed assailing the order dated 18.12.2023 (Annexure P/7) passed by the respondent No.5-Collector District Balaghat (M.P.) whereby the election petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 122 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 against the respondent No.1 was rejected.

2. It is a case of the petitioner that she contested elections and was duly appointed on the post of Member of Janpad Panchayat, No.20 Vikas Khand Khairlanjhi District Balaghat. The Respondent No.1 also contested elections for the post of Member of Janpad Panchayat, No. 19, Vikas Khand Khairlanjhi and was duly appointed on the post of Member of Janpad Panchayat, No.19, Vikas Khand Khairlanjhi. It is submitted that amongst Members of concerned Janpad Panchayat, for the post of President which has been reserved for OBC women candidate; the petitioner being eligible candidate submitted her candidature for the said post. The respondent No.1 was also elected on the post reserved for OBC women candidate, therefore, she submitted her candidature for the post of President, Janpad Panchayat Khairlanjhi. The petitioner got to know that respondent No.1 has not attested her OBC caste certificate along with her candidature which is mandatory requirement in terms of the M.P. Panchayat Nirvachan Rules, 1995 which was amended in the year 2019 and as per amended provisions, the submission of caste certificate is made mandatory. The candidate who wishes to contest the elections on the posts which are reserved for a particular category then it would be mandatory for him to annex caste certificate issued by the competent officer of Government of Madhya Pradesh. Attention is invited to the amended Rules of 2019 which is placed on record as Annexure P/3 and it is submitted that along with the nomination paper, the documents which are required to be annexed are provided and Sl. No. 2 i.e. 'Enclosed documents with nomination paper" clearly demonstrates that "copy of Caste certificate issued by competent officer of Government of Madhya Pradesh in case of a member of reserved category" is required to be submitted. Attention is also drawn to the nomination paper submitted by respondent No.1 in terms of Annexure P/2 and it is contended that no caste certificate is submitted by the respondent No.1. Page 19 of the compilation shows that as per Sl. No.2 of "vkjf{kr oxZ dk lnL; gksus dh n'kk esa] e/;izns'k 'kkeu ds le{k izkf/kdkjh }kjk tkjh tkfr izek.k&i= dh izfr-", the respondent No.1 has mentioned "ugha" and in Sl.No. 6, it is mentioned that the caste certificate of OBC has been issued from the State of Maharashtra and after marriage when she migrated to the State of Madhya Pradesh and her husband belongs to OBC category, she also belonged to that category. An affidavit to the aforesaid effect is submitted.

3. It is argued that the aforesaid aspect does not amount to submission of caste certificate and does not fulfil the requirement in terms of the amended Rules of 1995. The petitioner immediately filed an election petition under Section 122 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 and prayed that the respondent No.1 be declared as disqualified for the post in question as the nomination form itself should have been rejected at the threshold for want of necessary document. The learned Collector has not considered the aforesaid aspect of the matter and rejected the election petition filed by the petitioner on the ground that the affidavit as required in terms of the Circular dated 05.12.2014 has been submitted by the respondent No.1 despite the fact that after amendment in the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Nirvachan Niyam in the year 2019, it has become mandatory to produce the caste certificate. Therefore, the order passed by the Collector is unsustainable. To buttress the submissions, the petitioner's counsel has relied upon the orders passed by this Court in the cases of (i) Richa vs Smt. Sushila Singh and oth