Quashed

Kasturi Bai v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC13 Feb 2015CW/7674/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Full Bench cited view that pre-election disqualification must be adjudicated via election petition under Section 43. The Divisional Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to disqualify the petitioner for birth of third child after the specified date, rendering the order ex facie without jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed and the order dated 15.10.14 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Udaipur, declaring the petitioner disqualified to hold the post of Sarpanch, is quashed and set aside.

Kasturi Bai Vs State and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

Kasturi Bai Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S. B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7674/2014

¶3

Dated : 13/02/2015

¶4

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA

¶5

Mr. R.S.Choudhary, for the petitioner. Mr. Raman Kumar, on behalf of Mr. Manish Patel, AGC for the respondents.

¶6

The matter comes up on an application (IA No. 5796/14) preferred on behalf of the respondents for vacating the interim order passed by this Court. However, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard.

¶7

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of order dated 15.10.14 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Udaipur, whereby in exercise of the powers under Section 39(2) of the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short “the Act of 1994”), the petitioner has been declared disqualified to hold the post of Sarpanch and accordingly, the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Potla Kala, Panchayat Samiti Bhadesar, District Chittorgarh, has been declared vacant.

¶8

The petitioner has been disqualified to hold the post on the ground that after due inquiry, it is found that third child was born to her on 27.1.09, i.e. after 27.11.1995, therefore, in terms of Section 19(1) of the Act of 1994, she was

¶9

¶10

disqualified to contest the election for the post of Sarpanch. Admittedly, the petitioner was declared elected as Sarpanch on 22.1.10 and it is alleged that third child was born on 27.1.09, i.e. prior to her election as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Potla Kala.

¶11

In the matter of 'Smt. Sameera Bano Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.' 2007(2) WLC (Raj.) 526, the Full Bench of this Court has taken the view that pre-election disqualification can be adjudicated only in an election petition before the District Judge under Section 43 of he Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 read with rule 80 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994. Thus, the order impugned passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Udaipur, declaring the petitioner as disqualified to hold the post of Sarpanch in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 39(2) of the Act, on the basis of alleged pre election disqualification, is ex facie without jurisdiction.

¶12

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, the order impugned dated 15.10.14 (Annexure-11) passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Udaipur, is quashed and set aside.

¶13

(SANGEET LODHA), J.

¶14

Kasturi Bai v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kasturi Bai v. State 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

Nand Kishor Vs State and Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State and Ors.

Jagdish Chandra Vs Stat E and Ors.

Mrs. Preeti Vs Smt. Pratibha Inda and Ors.

Kalu Ram Vs the Prescribed Authority and Anr.

Standard Chromates Private Ltd. Vs None