GUDDI DEVI Vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of the present writ petitioner as well as civil Writ Petitions Nos. 17757 of 1994, 17775 of 1994, 18144 of 1994, 17831 of 1994, 17871 of 1994, 17880 of 1994, 18045 of 1994, 18060 of 1994, 18064 of 1994 and 18100 of 1994, as common questions of law and fact are involved in all these writ petitions.

(2.) We have taken the facts from this petition in order to decide the question of law enunciated in all these petitions. According to the averments made in this petition the State of Haryana decided to hold elections of Gram Panchayat in the State of Haryana. In accordance with the election programme the candidates were required to file their nomination papers before the competent authority from Ist of December, 1994 to 3rd of December, Thereafter the scrutiny by the Returning Officer was to be hold on 5th of December, 1994 and the candidates were permitted to withdraw from the election upto 6th of December, l994. The petitioner and three other candidates had also submitted their nomination papers for contesting the election for the office of the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Kangthal. The nomination papers of the petitioner were rejected by Block Development and Panchayat Officer respondent No. 4 on the basis of report of the Tehsildar, Guhla on the ground that Mulkh Raj (husband of the petitioner) is in unauthorised possession of the Panchayat land bearing Khasta No. 136. Thereafter the petitioner moved an application on 9th of December, 1994 to the Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal on the ground that nomination papers of the petitioner had been rejected illegally and with mala fide intention. It was pleaded that none of her family member was in unauthorised possession of the Gram Panchayat. Apart from that it was pleaded that the petitioner was paying separate Chuhla tax. It was further pleaded that according to the entry in the Jasmabandi for the year 1988-89 the ownership of the land in Khasra No. 136 is shown to be as panchayat Deh whereas under cultivation column it is mentioned that the same is in possession of common purpose (Makbuja Rafay-am) and in column No. 8 the said. Khasra No. is recorded as Gair Gorah Deh. It was next pleaded that even in the latest Khasra Girdawri for the year 1994 neither the petitioner nor any member of her family is shown to be in unauthorised possession of the land and that her nomination papers were rejected on thebasis of political pressure and also because of the reasons that wife of Billu Ram exM.L.A. and his brother's wife had also filed nomination papers for the office of the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Kangthal.

(3.) Similarly in C.W.P. No. 18100 of 1994 re: Manjit Singh v. State Election Commission, Haryana, C.W.P. No. 17775 of 1994 re: Sakooli Bai etc. v. S.D.O. (C) Fatehabad, C.W.P. No.18045 of 1994 Onkar Mal v. The State of Haryana, C.W.P. No. 17871 of 1994 Gian Chand v. S.D.O. (C) Fatehabad, C.W.P. No.17757 of 1994 Dalip, v. The Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, C.W.P. No. 17831 of 1994 Sahabu Deen v. State of Harayana and C.W. P. No. 18144 of 1994 re: Mangal Singh v. Haryana State the objections raised by the individual petitioner is with regard to illegal rejection of their nomination papers whereas in C.W.P. No.18060 of 1994 re: Hurmat v. District Election Officer (Panchayats) and C.W.P. No. 18068 of 1994 re : Dhanno Devi v. State of Haryana the objection is regarding quashment of voter's lists prepared and notified for the present election and C.W.P. No. 17880 of 1994 relates to alleged illegal acceptance of nomination papers.