Dismissed

Rami Saini v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Sept 2008CWP/12199/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged a government letter clarifying that Panchs from reserved categories can contest General Category Sarpanch elections, despite a reservation for General Category. Relying on Kasambhai Ghanchi, the court held that a woman elected from a General (Woman) seat was eligible to contest the General Category Sarpanch seat and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed as the respondent was found eligible to contest the Sarpanch election.

Rami Saini Vs State of Punjab… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.W.P. No.12199 of 2008

¶3

DATE OF DECISION: SEPTEMBER 03, 2008

Rami Saini

.....PETITIONER

Versus

State of Punjab and others

¶8

....RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr. Onkar Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr.Arvind Mittal, Addl.A.G.,Punjab, for the respondents.

¶12

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶13

The petitioner has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the impugned letter dated 27.5.20908 (Annexure P-3) vide which the respondent authorities have clarified that any Panch from the reserved category can contest election for the office of Sarpanch reserved for General Category. It has been further prayed that a direction be issued to the respondents to ensure that election of Sarpanch be conducted as per notification dated 25.4.2008.

¶14

In this case, as per the notification dated 25.4.2008, the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Kalensar, was reserved for General Category. The petitioner was elected as Panch from General Category. It is the case of the petitioner that since she was the only Panch who was elected from General Category, therefore, she was fully eligible to contest the election for the office of Sarpanch, which was reserved for

¶15

C.W.P. No.12199 of 2008 -2-

¶16

General Category. However, the State Government while issuing the letter dated 27.5.2008 has clarified that any Panch from the reserved category can also seek election for the office of Sarpanch reserved for General Category.

¶17

During the pendency of this petition, election to the office of Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat was conducted in which Smt.Nina Saini, who contested the election and declared elected as Panch against the seat reserved for General (Woman), has been declared elected to the office of Sarpanch on 17.7.2008. She also filed Civil Misc.application No.15420 of 2008 under Section 151 CPC for impleading her as a respondent. The said application has been allowed by this Court vide order of the even date passed separately, and she has been impleaded as respondent No.5 in the main writ petition.

¶18

After hearing the counsel for the parties, we are not inclined to accept the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The only issue for consideration is whether respondent No.5, being a woman, is eligible to contest the election for the office of Sarpanch, which is reserved for General Category, though she was elected as a Panch from the seat reserved for General (Woman). Similar question has already been answered by the Supreme Court in Kasambhai F.Ghanchi v. Chandubhai D.Rajput and others, 1998(2) PLR 611, wherein it was held that a candidate belonging to a Backward Class, who has been elected from an unreserved seat, is eligible to contest the election for the post of President of the Municipality which was reserved for a Backward Class candidate, while making the following observations:-

¶19

“The Act and the Rules provide for reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes and women. No

¶20

-3-

¶21

C.W.P. No.12199 of 2008

¶22

reservation or classification is made ward-wise. To put it differently all members of the Scheduled Castes, for example, will be regarded as belonging to one class irrespective of the fact whether they had been elected to a reserved seat or to a general seat. Similar is the position with regard to the Backward Classes, Scheduled Tribes and women. The law does not contemplate or provide for any further subclassification of the type which has been suggested by the respondents. Just as all members of the municipality, irrespective of the fact whether they had been elected to a reserved seat or not, are eligible for election to the post of the President when it falls in the general category, similarly when as per the roster the President is to be one who, say, belongs to the category of Scheduled Caste then all members of the municipality who are Scheduled Caste, irrespective of the seat to which they had been elected, would be eligible to stand for election. Neither the Act nor the rules stipulate that it is only such a member who has been elected to the reserved seat who would be eligible to stand for election to the post of President when it is the turn of that category of candidate to become the President of the municipality.”

¶23

In view of the above, we hold that though respondent No.5, who was elected as a Panch from the seat reserved for General (Woman), was fully eligible to contest the election for the office of Sarpanch, which was reserved for General Category. Thus, we do not find any merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶24

(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

¶25

September 03, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) vkg JUDGE

Rami Saini v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rami Saini v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paramjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Daljinder Kaur Vs the Election Tribunal Cum D.C.Patiala & Ors.

Gurbinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Karnail Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab etc.

Milkha Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.