- (1.) THE fifth respondent has been elected as Chairperson of the Nagar Panchayat Shankargarh, Allahabad, which was reserved for the Backward Classes. From the record it appears that an unsuccessful candidate had sought to challenge the caste certificate which was granted to the fifth respondent and had moved a writ petition before this Court, being Writ -C No. 3411 of 2014 (Smt. Ranjana Singh v. State of U.P. and others). By a judgment and order dated 21 January 2014 the writ petition was disposed of by directing the District Level Committee to decide upon the application within a period of three months. From the record it is not clear as to whether the District Level Committee has decided upon the validity of the caste certificate.
(2.) IN these proceedings, the petitioners have sought a writ of quo warranto as against the fifth respondent. We find merit in the contention of learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the fifth respondent that in view of the bar contained under Article 243 ZG(b) of the Constitution, an election to a Municipality can be called in question only by means of an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State. The writ of quo warranto cannot be a substitute for a substantive election petition challenging the validity of the election.
(3.) BE that as it may, we are of the view that the earlier direction, which was issued by the Division Bench of this Court on 21 January 2014 in Writ -C No. 3411 of 2014, must be duly observed by the District Level Committee. Hence, we direct that unless an order has been passed by the District Level Committee, the Committee shall duly comply with the direction issued by the Division Bench. We fix an outer limit of three months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order for a final decision on the validity of the caste certificate. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.;