SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) None appears on behalf of the respondents, despite service. This petition is preferred for challenging the order dated 11.05.2015 passed by the District Judge, Bikaner, whereby the election petition preferred by the respondent No. 1 Sumitra questioning the election of the petitioner as Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Udasar, Panchayat Samiti Panchu, District Bikaner has been transferred for hearing and disposal to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Bikaner.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that as per provisions of Section 43 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short "the Act"), the election petition filed questioning the election of the returned candidate, presented before the District Judge having jurisdiction can be transferred for the reasons to be recorded in writing for hearing and disposal to a Civil Judge or Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) subordinate to District Judge concerned and thus, the order impugned passed by the District Judge, Bikaner, transferring the petition to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Bikaner is not sustainable in the eye of law.
(3.) I have considered the arguments advanced and gone through the impugned order and other material available on record.;