Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. - (1.) THE compendium of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that the Petitioner and the private Respondents contested the elections of the Panchayat Samiti, Safidon, for Ward No. 23 held on 06.06.2010. Respondent No. 5 was declared elected vide result -sheets(Annexures P/3 and P/4) in this regard.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the election results, the Petitioner filed the instant writ petition for quashing the result -sheets(Annexures P/3 and P/4) issued by Respondent No. 4, invoking the provisions of Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. The Respondents contested the claim of the Petitioner and raised a preliminary objection of maintainability of the writ petition, in view of the availability of the alternative remedy of the election petition, as contemplated under Section 176 of The Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994(hereinafter to be referred as "the Act").
(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable help and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, the instant writ petition is not maintainable in this context.;