PERMOD KOHLI,J - (1.) PURSUANT to the constitutional mandate contained in Article 243-B of the Constitution of India, process for constitution of Panchayats at village level was initiated by the State of Punjab by issuing following election schedule : "(i) Nomination papers to be filled: 13.5.08 to 16.5.08 (ii) Scrutiny: 17.5.08 (iii) Last date for withdrawing the Nomination papers: 19.5.08 (iv) Date of Polling: 26.5.08"
(2.) GENERAL election in various Panchayats was to be held on 26.5.2008. Various notifications have been issued for purposes of delimitation and reservation, in accordance with the provisions of Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 and Part IX of the Constitution of India. Nomination papers were to be filled between 13.5.2008 to 16.5.2008 followed with scrutiny on 17.5.2008. Last date for withdrawal of nomination papers was 19.5.2008 and the polling was held on 26.5.2008. This Court has been flooded with a large number of writ petitions challenging rejection of nomination papers, acceptance of nomination papers, alleged fraudulent withdrawal of the candidates from the contest, tampering with the record and numerous other allegations of misconduct on the part of the Officers associated with the election. Some petitions relate to reservation and non-reservation of the wards. There are some petitions where serious allegations have been made against the candidates, Returning Officers and other poll related staff as also some of the Ministers of the State Government. In some cases, FIRs have also been registered. However, we refrain ourselves from going into the details of such allegations in these petitions at this stage.
(3.) THE necessity to take up these matters during vacation has arisen in view of certain orders passed by the Punjab State Election Commission and even Returning Officers whereby elections in certain Panchayats have been either countermanded or cancelled. In some cases, the nomination papers were initially rejected, but subsequently shown to have been accepted. Similarly, in some cases, the nomination papers were initially accepted and later on shown to have been rejected. In CWP Nos. 9573, 9829, 9876, 10414, 10547, 10693, 10724, 10751 and 10815 of 2008, results of election were declared by the Returning Officers concerned. After the candidates were declared elected, on the basis of some complaints either to the Returning Officer or to the State Election Authority, the elections have been countermanded. In some cases, after enquiry and recording reasons whereas in other cases, without any reason. In other petitions, elections have been countermanded before the same could be finalized/declared on conclusion of the polling i.e. before the polling could be held.;