Telangana High Court
Palvancha Shekar vs The State Of Telangana on 3 October, 2023
Author: B. Vijaysen Reddy
Bench: B. Vijaysen Reddy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.17763 of 2023
ORDER:
Election petition in EOP.No.1 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Medak, was instituted by the respondent No.6 herein (election petitioner) against the petitioner (elected as Sarpanch), to declare him as disqualified to contest to the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Aregudem Village, under Section 21 of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 (for short 'the Act'), for having more than two children. The election petition was allowed by order dated 26.06.2023.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that in pursuance of the election notification issued for conducting elections to the post of Sarpanch of various gram panchayats, the petitioner filed nomination on 11.01.2019 for Aregudem Village, Toopran Division along with respondent No.6. The elections were held on 25.01.2019 and results were declared on the same day. The petitioner secured 177 votes as against 159 votes secured by the respondent No.6. The respondent No.6 raised objection to the nomination of the petitioner before the Returning Officer alleging that the petitioner is having more three children. However, for want of proof, the said objection was not accepted. Thereafter, the respondent No.6 petitioner filed EOP.No.1 of 2019. The respondent No.6 examined 2 himself as P.W.1 and adduced evidence of P.W.2 and relied upon Exs.P1 to P14 documents. The petitioner examined himself as R.W.1 and examined R.Ws.2 to 4 on his behalf and relied on Exs.R1 and R2.
4. Mr. V. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Medak, lacked inherent jurisdiction to entertain the election petition. It is submitted that though the aforesaid point was not raised before the trial Court and no specific issue was framed by the learned District Judge, as the Court lacks inherent jurisdiction, the impugned order passed by the District Court is without jurisdiction and non-est and hence, liable to be set aside.
5. Learned counsel further submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 29.01.2019, the authority to dispose of election petition is the Junior Civil Judge, designated as Election Tribunal as defined in Rule 2 of the Rules. Thus, the election petition lies before the Junior Civil Judge and not before the District Judge.
6. Several points have been raised in the writ petition, however, since the preliminary issue regarding lack of jurisdiction is raised, it may not be necessary for this Court to delve into other issues. 3
7. Impugned order dated 26.06.2023 passed in Election OP.No.1 of 2019 was suspended by this Court by order dated 14.07.2023.
8. Mr. A. Jagan, learned counsel for the respondent No.6, submitted that as per Section 27 of the Act, any person, disqualified under Sections 19 to 25 of the Act, can approach the District Court, which is competent to decided election petition. He further submitted that the Principal District and Sessions Court, Medak, rightly exercised jurisdiction and disqualified the petitioner for having three children, in terms of Section 21(3) of the Act.
9. Heard Mr. V. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A. Jagan, learned counsel for the respondent No.6, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and learned standing counsel for respondent No.5.
10. Section 27 of the Act reads as under:
"27. Authority to decide questions of disqualification of members.--
(1) Where an allegation is made that any person who is elected as a member of a Gram Panchayat is not qualified or has become disqualified under Sections 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25 by any voter or authority to the Panchayat Secretary in writing and the Panchayat Secretary has given intimation of such allegation to the member through the District Panchayat Officer and such member disputes the correctness of the allegation so made, or where any 4 member himself entertains any doubt whether, or not he has become disqualified under any of those sections, such member or any other member may, and the Panchayat Secretary, at the direction of the Gram Panchayat or the District Collector shall, within a period of two months from the date on which such intimation is given or doubt is entertained, as the case may be, apply to the District Court having jurisdiction over the area in which office of the Gram Panchayat is situated for decision.
(2) Pending such decision, the member shall be entitled to act as if he is qualified or were not disqualified."
11. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent No.6 is that a person aggrieved by any intimation/decision of disqualification under Sections 19 to 25 of the Act is entitled to approach the District Court. However, the instant case is not related to intimation/decision of any authority disqualifying the petitioner in terms of Section 27 of the Act. The order impugned is passed in an election petition and it is only the Junior Civil Judge, who is competent to decide the election petition in terms of G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 29.01.2019. On a complaint lodged by a voter or authority, proceedings can be initiated for disqualification of elected member of Gram Panchayat on any of the enumerated grounds under Sections 19 to 25 of the Act. But in the present case such disqualification proceedings was not subject matter before the District Court. The dispute before the District Court was an election 5 dispute and it is only the Junior Civil Judge who got jurisdiction under G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 29.01.2019.
12. In view of the above discussion, this Court holds that the Principal District Judge, Medak, lacks inherent jurisdiction to entertain Election OP.No.1 of 2019. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 26.06.2023 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Principal District Judge, Medak, who shall forthwith assign the same to the Junior Civil Judge having jurisdiction in terms of G.O.Ms.No.4 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Part 3) Department dated 29.01.2019. The concerned Junior Civil Judge shall proceed with the case from the stage of trial. The pleadings filed by the parties before the District Judge along with their documents shall form part of the record of the Junior Civil Judge. It is made clear it is not necessary for the parties to file fresh pleadings and documents. However, the parties are at liberty to amend their pleadings and file additional documents if they are so advised. The Junior Civil Judge shall decide the matter within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
____________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J October 3, 2023/DSK