A.L.BAHRI, J. - (1.) KARAM Kaur petitioner in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for a writ of certiorari quashing co-option of Amarjit Kaur, respondent NO. 6, as member of the Gram panchayat, Jatpur, and a further direction to the respondents to declare the petitioner as Sarpanch. Election of members of the Gram Panchayat, Jatpur, was held on February 20, 1993. There were three women candidates, namely, Nachhattar Kaur, Karam Kaur and Anr. (Parkash Kaur) who contested the election. Nachhattar Kaur obtained 44 votes and was declared elected. Petitioner Karam Kaur obtained 29 votes and the third candidate secured two votes. It was on November 13, 1993 when Panchayat meeting was held, Amarjit Kaur respondent No. 6 was co-opted as member of the Panchayat. The present petition was filed by Karam Kaur challenging the co-option of Amarjit Kaur and for a declaration in her own favour as stated above. Gram Panchayat respondent No. 5 and Amarjit Kaur respondent No. 6 who are the contesting respondents, have filed written statement contesting the petition. They have asserted therein that the writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of limitation. From the declaration of the results election petition could be filed within 30 days as contemplated under Section 13-C of the Gram Panchayat Act. No election petition was filed by the petitioner either against the declaration of the result or against the co-option of respondent No. 6. It is further asserted that co-option of Amarjit Kaur respondent No. 6 was done by respondent No. 3 Block Development and Panchayat Officer and it was brought to the notice of all the members of the Panchayat.
(2.) AFTER hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the view that merely on the ground of delay the relief which is legally due to the petitioner cannot be denied. Section 6 (4) of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act reads as under : "6 (4) In every Gram Panchayat there shall be at least two women Panches and if only one woman or no woman is elected as a Panch and the number of unsuccessful contesting woman candidates is two or more, then one woman or two women, as the case may be, securing the highest number of valid votes from amongst unsuccessful women candidates shall be deemed to have been elected as Panch; Provided that if only one woman or no woman is deemed to have been elected then one woman or two woman, as the case may be, shall be co-opted by the Gram Panchayat in the prescribed manner from amongst members of the Gram Sabha qualified to be elected as Panch. " A bare perusal of the provision aforesaid reveals that in every Gram Panchayat there must be at least two women Panches. If one woman is elected, the other woman who had contested the election would be deemed to have been elected. In the present case, as already stated above, there were three women candidates. Nachhaattar Kaur having been declared elected securing 44 votes, out of the remaining two women candidates the petitioner having secured 29 votes which was more than the votes obtained by the third candidate was entitled to be declared as elected. Since first meeting of the members of the Panchayat was held on November 13, 1903, the petitioner did not file the petition hoping that under the law she would be called to participate in the proceedings of the Panchayat. According to the petitioner the co-option of respondent No. 6 did not come to her notice and it was immediately after she came to know about it that she filed the present writ petition. Obviously when she was not present in the meeting, the limitation for challenging the co-option of respondent No. 6 would start from her gaining knowledge of the same. Otherwise Section 13-C of the Gram Panchayat Act could not be attracted to the case. The ratio of the decision in Surinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. , 1983 (II) L. L. R. 595, cannot be strictly applied to the case in hand wherein the High Court declined to entertain the petition filed beyond 30 days, the period prescribed for filing election petition.
(3.) THE petitioner could not file election petition against the co-option of respondent No. 6 as the prescribed authority before whom the election petition could be filed could not declare the petitioner as duly elected in that petition. The relief that the petitioner be declared elected as Panch in view of Section 6 (4) of the Act can be granted by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.;