LAWS(MPH)-2022-12-2

BHANWARIBAI Vs. MADHYA PRADESH ELECTION COMMISSION

Decided On December 12, 2022
Bhanwaribai Appellant
V/S
Madhya Pradesh Election Commission Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 5/12/2022 passed by the Presiding Officer in election petition rejecting the application for grant of stay filed by the petitioners.

(2.) The petitioners are elected members of Janpad Panchayat, Ujjain. The petitioner No.1 was also contesting for the post of President. The election of the President and Vice President was scheduled on 27/7/2022. According to the petitioners, all the 13 petitioners were deprived from casting vote by the Returning Officer and the minority group consisting of 12 persons got the President elected. Being aggrieved with it, the petitioners filed a petition before this Court which was registered as WP No.17927 of 2022. Initially this court passed an interim order and stayed the publication of the Notification u/S.26 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayati Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter the same shall be referred as Adhiniyam). However, the said petition was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy of filing election petition. After receipt of the order passed by this court, the respondent No.2 immediately issued Notification u/S.26 read with Rule 22 of M.P. Panchayat Election Rules 1994 (hereinafter the same is referred as the Rules). The petitioner filed an election petition on 16/11/2022 and on the same day, the election tribunal granted stay on the first meeting. However, by the impugned order, the said stay order has not been extended further and the application for grant of stay has been rejected.

(3.) The Notification u/S.26 was published on 14/11/2022 and as per the provisions of Sec.27 of Adhiniyam, first meeting of Janpad Panchayat has to be held within 30 days of the date of publication u/S.26 and, therefore, the tribunal has rightly declined to continue the stay order. The stay order could not have been continued in view of the mandate of Sec.26 of and 27 of Adhiniyam which reads as under:-