MADANLAL Vs. NANDLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ petition by one Madanlal challenging an order of Munsif, Bhilwara dated 28th February, 1966 (Exhibit 3 on record) whereby, on an election petition by non-petitioner Nandlal, the election of the petitioner as Panch as also as Up-sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Kachola, Tehsil Mandalgarh, was set aside. The relevant facts are briefly these.

(2.) ELECTIONS for the Gram Panchayat Kachola were held ward-wise on 7th January, 1965. Petitioner Madanlal stood as a candidate from ward No. 5 for the office of Panch and he was elected as Panch from that ward. Non-petitioner Nandlal, who was an elector of ward No. 2 of the Gram Panchayat stood as a candidate for the office of the Panch from that ward and he too was elected. After the election, co-option for other members of the Panchayat took place and another Nandlal, Smt. Kajodi and Smt. Udi were co-opted as members of the Gram Panchayat at a meeting held on 9th January, 1965. Thereafter, the election of Up-sarpanch was held and the petitioner, who was already elected as a Panch, was elected as Up sarpanch. Non-petitioner Nandlal then filed a single election petition before the Munsif, Bhilwara wherein he challenged (1) the election of the petitioner as Panch, (2) election of the petitioner as Up-sarpanch and (3) the co-option of Nanda, Smt. Kajodi and Smt. Udi. The election of the petitioner as Panch and Up-sarpanch was challenged on the ground that he was below 25 years of age. I need not refer to the grounds on which co-option of Nanda, Smt. Kajodi and Smt. Udi was challenged as this writ petition does not concern the co-option. The petitioner contested the election petition and it was asserted by him that he was above the prescribed age of 25 years, being 26 and was, therefore, qualified to stand as a Panch or Up-sarpanch. He also pleaded that the election petition was not in accordance with Rules and it was, therefore, not maintainable. Both the parties led evidence. The Munsif came to the conclusion, on consideration of the evidence that the petitioner was below 25 years of age on the date of election and was consequently not eligible for election. In the result he set aside the election of the petitioner both as a Panch and an Upsarpanch.