Disposed

K.Meena v. The Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Aug 2022WP/3047/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the rejection of her nomination for the reserved BC women Sarpanch post. The Court directed authorities under Section 227(1) of AP Panchayat Raj Act 1994 to initiate action against the rejection and ordered a fresh grievance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to authorities to initiate action under Section 227(1) AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 against the person who erroneously rejected the petition nomination.

K.Meena Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission — Election Law | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.3047 of 2021

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vivek Chandrasekhar, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶5

The present writ petition is filed to issue Rule Nisi calling for records leading to rejection of appeal by the 3^rd respondent in Appeal Roc.B/S-02/2021 dated 03.02.2021 by confirming the rejection of the petitioner’s nomination for the post of Sarpanch, Narayanavanam Gram Panchayat, Narayanavanam Mandal, Chittoor District through a letter dated 01.02.2021 issued by the 4^th respondent as illegal and arbitrary.

¶6

The brief facts of the case of the petitioner are that on 23.01.2021, the 1^st respondent issued election notification in order to conduct local body elections in four phases. In respect of Narayanavanam Gram Panchayat the Post of Sarpanch is reserved for BC women category and the election to Narayanavanam Gram Panchayt is scheduled in phase-I. As per the schedule in phase-I, the nominations are to be

¶7

¶8

submitted from 29.01.2021 to 31.01.2021, scrutiny of nominations is on 01.02.2021, appeal against returning officer order on 02.02.2021, disposal of appeal on 03.02.2021, withdrawal of nominations and final list publication is on 04.02.2021 and polling of votes is on 09.02.2021. Therefore, the petitioner being a women, belonging to the BC category submitted her nomination form on 30.01.2021 to the 4^th respondent since the subject Sarpanch post of the Gram Panchayat is reserved only for BC Women category. The petitioner herein also submitted a certificate which was duly issued by the Tahsildar, who is the competent authority wherein it is admitted that the petitioner is a ‘Vanyakulakshatriya’ and comes under BC-A category. While so, the 4^th respondent without looking into the certificate, rejected the nomination of the petitioner on the ground that the subject certificate, which was appended to the nomination form was attested by a private college principal and the same cannot be considered. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no requirement of any attestation as the certificate was issued

¶10

¶11

by the Tahsildar, who is the competent authority to issue such certificate. But as a caution, she got attested the copy of caste certificate with the principal of a private college. She further submits that such an erroneous rejection by the 4^th respondent should be deprecated.

¶12

In fact, the elections of the Gram Panchayat were already completed as per the schedule and the results were also declared.

¶13

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, as enumerated above, it is appropriate that there should be a direction to the authorities concerned to initiate appropriate action under Section 227(2)(a)(b) of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 against the person who rejected the nomination of the petitioner erroneously and also for his dereliction of duties.

¶14

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to submit a representation afresh to the concerned higher authority i.e., commissioner of the concerned higher authority requesting to take steps under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 within a period of

¶15

¶16

three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The concerned higher authority, on receipt of such representation is directed to pass appropriate orders within a period of three (3) months after following the procedure as contemplated under Section 227(2)(a)(b) of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to the 4^th respondent. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶17

VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

Dt:22.08.2022 BSP

162

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.3047 of 2021

¶23

Dated:22.08.2022

¶24

BSP

K.Meena v. The Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Meena v. The Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Sai Baba All castes, Sand and Boat Workers and other Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Pamulapati Siva Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

I.Padmavathi and another Vs the Sub Registrar, Penugonda and Another

Challa Naresh Kumar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kanikanti Diwakar Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Vanteru Krishna Reddy Vs Sri Shashibushan Kumar