Manvinder Singh vs State Election Commission on 20 October, 2008

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH.

                                                C.W.P. No. 13894 of 2008
                                       DATE OF DECISION : 20.10.2008

Manvinder Singh
                                                         .... PETITIONER

                                  Versus

State Election Commission, Chandigarh and others

                                                      ..... RESPONDENTS

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


Present:    Mr. M.P.S. Mann, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab,
            for respondents No.1 to 4.

            Mr. N.P.S. Mann, Advocate,
            for respondent No.5.

                  ***

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )

The petitioner, who contested the election of Panch of Gram

Panchayat, Village Dialpura, District SAS Nagar, has filed this petition

under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the

notification dated 27.6.2008, whereby Mohinder Singh respondent No.5 has

been wrongly notified as Panch of the Gram Panchayat.

Undisputedly, the petitioner and respondent No.5 contested the

election of Panch of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat against the seat reserved

for General category. In the said election, the petitioner was declared as
CWP No. 13894 of 2008 -2-

elected as he secured 186 votes, whereas respondent No.5 Mohinder Singh

was declared defeated, as he secured only 88 votes. It is also admitted

position that the Presiding Officer cum Returning Officer sent result sheet

for notification, but somehow or other, by mistake, the State Election

Commission notified the name of Mohinder Singh respondent No.5 as

Panch of the Gram Panchayat, instead of Manvinder Singh petitioner.

In the written statement, filed on behalf of respondents No.2

and 3, the aforesaid mistake has been admitted. Therefore, on September 18,

2008, the case was adjourned for notifying the correct notification. Counsel

for respondent No.5 has placed on record copy of the order dated 1.9.2008,

passed by the State Election Commissioner, Punjab, whereby the

recommendation of the District Electoral Officer-cum-Deputy

Commissioner, SAS Nagar, has been accepted and name of the petitioner

has been ordered to be notified as elected Panch of the Gram Panchayat.

Counsel for respondents No.1 to 4 further states that in view of this order,

the necessary notification will be issued within a period of one month.

In view of the aforesaid statement of counsel for respondents

No.1 to 4, counsel for the petitioner states that he does not want to press this

petition.

Dismissed as not pressed.

                                         ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
                                                 JUDGE


October 20, 2008                            ( JASWANT SINGH )
ndj                                               JUDGE