Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Yenuganti Thriveni vs The State Of Ap on 6 September, 2023
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
WRIT PETITION No.4615 OF 2021
JUDGMENT:
Heard Smt V. Sireesha Rani, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for the Municipal Administration and Urban Development for the respondents 1 and 3 and Sri S. Vivek Chandrasekhar, learned standing counsel for the respondents 2 and 4.
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved from the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 12.03.2020, 13.03.2020 and 12.02.2021 regarding the disqualification of 5th respondent for contesting the election of Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency for short MPTC under the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act (for short "the Act"), on the ground that the 5th respondent incurred disqualification under Section 19 of the Act.
3. The election had been conducted during pendency of the writ petition. The declaration was made on 08.04.2021 in which the 5th respondent was elected.
4. The petitioner has not challenged the election of the 5th respondent by filing the Election Petition. 2
5. The period of limitation to file election petition has also expired.
6. Even in the present writ petition, there is no challenge to the election of the 5th respondent.
7. It is well settled in law that ordinarily this Court would not invoke its writ jurisdiction in election matters. The parties are to get their grievance and election dispute settled in a statutorily constituted alternative Forum by way of election petition.
8. In Kalla Ramakrishna vs. State Election Commission and others1, relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 4, the Full Bench of this court held that right from Ponnuswami vs. Returning Officer2, it has been consistently laid down the law that election covers the entire process i.e from the issue of the notification under the relevant legislation to the declaration of the result and having regard to the important functions which the legislatures have to perform in democratic countries, it has always been recognized to be a matter of first importance that elections should be concluded as early as possible according to the time schedule and all controversial matters and all disputes arising out of elections 1 2005(26)AIC 764 2 AIR 1952 SC 64 3 should be postponed till the elections are over. The person interested in questioning the elections has to wait till the election is over and institute a petition in accordance with the law calling in question the election of the successful candidate.
9. The dispute as is being raised here, is an election dispute with respect to the acceptance of the nomination of the 5th respondent, which could be raised in the election petition questioning the election of the 5th respondent. However, the petitioner has chosen not to challenge the election.
10. In view of the subsequent development taking place, and in the absence of the challenge to the election, the writ petition is dismissed.
11. No order as to costs.
Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.
_________________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J Date:06.09.2023 Gk 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI WRIT PETITION No.4615 OF 2021 Date:06.09.2023 Gk