R.R. Prasad, J. - (1.) PRAYER , which has been made in this writ application, is that the Respondent concerned be directed not to reject the nomination paper of the Petitioner for election of Mukhia of Dhowadanga Panchayat.
(2.) MR . Rajeeva Sharma, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner, a member of the Scheduled Tribes community, is a permanent resident of village - Dhowadanga, district -Pakur whose name was there in the voter list prepared in the year 2005 and also 2009, but in the voter list, published in the year 2010 for the purpose of election of Gram Panchayat to be held on 27.11.2010. name of the Petitioner was mala fidely, illegally and arbitrarily was not included as a result of which, the Petitioner would be deprived of his valuable right to contest election of Mukhia and as such the Petitioner has moved to this Court for a direction to the concerned Authority not to reject his nomination paper submitted on the basis of the electoral roll published in the year 2005 and 2009. Learned Advocate General by referring to Article 243O of the Constitution of India submits that since the matter pertains to election of Gram Panchayat, it cannot be called in question except by an election petition presented before a Competent Authority and in the manner as provided under law. In this respect, learned Advocate General and also Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned Counsel appearing for the State Election Commission, would submit that keeping in view the constitutional mandate, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in number of cases has held that process of election of Parliament, State Legislature, Municipality, Gram Panchayat etc. cannot be questioned in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, rather that can be questioned only by way of election petition. Learned Counsel in this respect referred to the decisions rendered in the cases of Kishansing Tomar v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahamd bad and Ors. { : (2006) 8 S.C.C. 352} and Anugrah Narain Singh and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors. { : (1996) 6 S.C.C. 303}.
(3.) MR . Sumeet Gadodia, learned Counsel, by referring to the statements made in the counter affidavit submits that the Petitioner never took any objection against non -inclusion of his name in the voter list. Thus, it was submitted that the Petitioner instead of taking recourse available under the relevant rule has moved this Court in order to stall the process of election.;