Petitioner challenged quashing of wife's election due to disqualification claim. Court refused merits check to avoid multiplicity of proceedings as wife separately challenged same order. Case dismissed without entertaining petition.
Petition not entertained to avoid multiplicity of proceedings; case closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
:: ORDER ::
D.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.4590/ 2013 Jagmohan Yadav Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Date of Order : 08.07.2013
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AMITAVA ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA
Mr.Kailash Chandra Sharma for the petitioner.
BY THE COURT (PER HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) :
Heard Mr.Kailash Chandra Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.
For the order proposed to be passed, it is not felt necessary to issue formal notice to the respondents.
The petitioner seeks to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court being aggrieved by the determination made by the respondent No.2 disqualifying his wife Smt.Himmat Bai under Section 39(2) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short, hereafter referred to as 'the Act') and the rules framed thereunder, thereby declaring her election to the Gram Panchayat, Kasar, Panchayat Samiti, Ladpura, District Kota from Ward No.8 to be void.
The pleaded case of the petitioner is that his wife contested the election to the aforementioned office in the OBC Women quota and was duly declared elected thereto. Noticing persistent dereliction of duty, she lodged a complaint against Smt.Kalpana Jain, who was posted as
2
A.N.M. in the hospital located in the village concerned. On receiving this complaint, the Sarpanch of the village, forwarded the same to the higher authorities, for which Smt.Kalpana Jain being offended, submitted a representation before the respondent No.2 alleging that as the petitioner's wife had given birth to her fourth child after 27.11.1995, she was disqualified from contesting the election. On receiving this representation, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner's wife, who duly submitted her reply alongwith all necessary documents demonstrating in clear terms that her last child was born on 27.4.1992, and that, the allegation that she was disqualified, was wholly baseless. It has been alleged by the petitioner that inspite of this, without making any enquiry as contemplated in law, the respondent No.2 by his order issued in August, 2004 ( Annexure-5 to the writ petition ), held her to be disqualified under Section 39(2) of the Act and cancelled her membership to the aforenamed gram panchayat.
The learned counsel has reiterated the above and sought for the intervention of this Court on the ground that not only the impugned order has been mechanically passed without reference to the actual facts involved, it lacks bona fide as well, besides being in contravention of the letter and spirit of the provisions of the Act. In course of the arguments, he further disclosed that a similar challenge has been laid by his wife against the same order.
Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and on a consideration of the pleaded averments and the documents on record,
3
we are not inclined to interfere on merits in this parallel proceeding. As the same decision has been challenged by the petitioner's wife, as is submitted before us, we are of the opinion that the instant petition ought not to be entertained to avoid multiplicity of the proceedings. It is
thus closed. (VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA),J. (AMITAVA ROY),C.J. Skant/ -
Al l t he cor r ect i ons made i n t he j udgment / or der have been i ncor por at ed i n t he j udgment / or der bei ng emai l ed. Shashi Kant Gaur , PA
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jagmohan Yadav
State of Rajasthan
Respondent No.2
Amitava Roy
Veerendrh Singh Siradhana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
