- (1.) By these writ petitions validity of Rule 81 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 (for short Rules of 1994) has been challenged.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that explanation appended to Rule 81 of the Rules of 1994 is in conflict with Section 43 of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act 1994, (for short Act of 1994), thus it may be struck down.
(3.) Learned counsel submit that as per Section 43 of the Act of 1994, an election can be called in question by any candidate at such election by presenting a petition in the prescribed manner to the District Judge. As per the mandate of Section 43 of the Act of 1994, presentation of the petition has to be by a candidate at such election. The explanation appended to Rule 81 of the Rules of 1994, however, allows presentation of the petition by the person making the petition or by a person authorised in writing in this behalf by the person making the petition. The explanation authorised any other person to present the election petition whereas it is not so permitted under Section 43 of the Act of 1994. The explanation to the rule 81 is thus in conflict with the Act thus deserves to be struck down. In view of the above, while declaring explanation to Rule 81 (1) of the Rules of 1994 to be illegal, the election petition preferred by the respondent be held to be not maintainable.;