Dismissed

Ashok Kumar v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Nov 2012CWP/18993/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that the petitioner, whose election was set aside, is relegated to filing an appeal under Section 100 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994. The respondent must not object to a delayed appeal if based on their own argument forcing the alternative remedy.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was relegated to filing an appeal under Section 100 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994, and the writ petition was disposed of.

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Election Law | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18993 OF 2010 :{ 1 }:

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 09, 2012

Ashok Kumar

.....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

¶10

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?

¶11

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

Present: Mr. B. S. Sidhu, Advocate for Mr. Gurpartap Singh Gill, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶14

Ms. Anu Pal, AAG, Punjab, for the State.

¶15

Mr. S. K. Arora, Advocate, for respondent No.6.

¶16

¶17

RANJIT SINGH, J.

¶18

The petitioner has filed this writ petition to challenge the order passed by the Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal-cum-Deputy Director, Urban Local Bodies, Ferozepur, whereby respondent No.7, Rajinder Kumar, has been declared as elected Panch of Gram Panchayat Mandi Wal, Block Guru Har Sahai, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Ferozepur.

¶19

Notice in this case has been issued.

¶20

Counsel for respondent No.7 has filed reply and raised a

¶21

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18993 OF 2010 :{ 2 }:

¶22

preliminary objection that once the election of the petitioner has been set-aside and respondent No.7 has been declared elected as a Panch by the Election Tribunal, the remedy of appeal is provided for under Section 100 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994. Earlier the petitioner had filed a petition against the order passed by the respondent-Election Tribunal to direct recounting of the votes. Since now the election of the petitioner has been setaside, he has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order.

¶23

The petitioner is, therefore, relegated to the remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order. In case there is any delay on the part of the petitioner in filing the appeal, the petitioner would be at liberty to move an application, seeking condonation of delay on the ground that he was pursuing his remedy before this Court. The respondents shall not raise any objection to the appeal being filed with delay, since it is on the basis of their objection that the petitioner is relegated to his alternative remedy of filing an appeal.

¶24

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶25

(RANJIT SINGH ) JUDGE

¶26

November 09, 2012 khurmi

Ashok Kumar v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Renu Ranga and Anr. Vs Pt. Bhagwat Dayal Sharma Univ. of Health Science, Rohtak and Anr.

Rashpinder Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab Thru Commissioner and Ors.

Sukhblas Singh Vs F.C. Appeals-I, Punjab & Ors.

Vinay & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Gurpreet Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Shri Dhanwantry Educational Society Vs Pb. University and Ors.