Full Judgment
Kumar ViNo.2013.07.05 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.7135 of 2013 [1].***** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.7135 of 2013 Date of decision:04.07.2013 Vinita Pipal ...Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain Present: Mr.J.S.Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Partap Singh, Addl.
A.G., Haryana, and Mr.Nitin Kaushal, AAG, Haryana.
Mr.Arvind Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Mr.Mukesh Kumar Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.5.
Mr.Satyaveer Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.6.
Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for respondent No.7.
***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.
(Oral) The petitioner has challenged the election of respondent No.7 who has been unanimously elected as the President of Municipal Council, Rewari.
Shorn of unnecessary details, the Municipal Council, Rewari, has 31 wards.
The petitioner, though a Scheduled Caste, contested from General Ward No.29 and elected as Councillor.
The post of President of the Municipal Council, Rewari, was reserved for Scheduled Caste (Woman).Shri I.P.Bishnoi, ADC, Rewari, was the Returning Officer of the election who gave the certificate of election to the returned candidates.
In order to elect the President and to administer oath to the duly elected members in terms of Rule 70 of the Haryana Municipal Elections Rules, Kumar ViNo.2013.07.05 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.7135 of 2013 [2].***** 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”.).a meeting was convened on 20.03.2013 at 11.30 a.m.at Mini Secretariat, Rewari.
All the 31 elected members and Ex-officio Member of Parliament and Member of Legislative Assembly participated in the said meeting.
The State Election Commission, Haryana, vide its letter dated 17.04.2013, issued instructions to regulate election of the office of President and Vice President to the Municipalities while exercising powers conferred under Article 243 ZA of the Constitution of India and Section 3A of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973.
As per those instructions, the candidates, who were desirous to contest for the office of President and Vice President, were to fill up a nomination paper in the format provided in the instructions, which reads as under:- “FORM OF NOMINATION PAPER FOR ELECTION FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT/VICE PRESIDENT OF MUNICIPAL COUNCIL/COMMITTEE.
Name of Municipal Council/Committee __________________ Name in full of candidate __________________ Father's name/Husband's name __________________ Full address __________________ Name in full of proposer __________________ Signature of the proposer __________________ Name in full of Seconder __________________ Signature of the Seconder __________________ DECLARATION OF CANDIDATE I hereby declare that I agree to the nomination and I am willing to serve.
PLACE______________ DATE ______________ Signature of candidate DECLARATION BY A CANDIDATE WHO IS A MEMBER OF ANY SCHEDULED CASTE/BACKWARD CLASS I do hereby declare that I am a member of the _______ caste which has been declared to be the Scheduled Caste/Backward Class in the State of Haryana.
DATE_______________ Signature of candidate (To be filled in by the Deputy Commissioner or the Officer appointed by him) Kumar ViNo.2013.07.05 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.7135 of 2013 [3].***** CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY Sr.No.__________ This nomination paper was delivered to me at my office at ______ (date and hour) _____________ DATE: Signature of the Deputy Commissioner or the Officer appointed by him CERTIFICATE OF SCRUTINY I have scrutinized the eligibility of the candidate and find that he is qualified to stand for election, and I, therefore, accept the nomination ____________.
I have scrutinized this nomination and reject it for the following reasons: DATE: Signature of the Deputy Commissioner or the Officer appointed by him”.
It is also provided in the instructions that every candidate for election to the office of President and Vice President of Municipal Council/Committee shall fill the prescribed nomination Form duly signed by two of the elected Members of the Municipal Council/Committee; one as proposer and another as a seconder.
No member is allowed to propose or second more than one candidate.
The nomination papers are then delivered to the Deputy Commissioner or the officer appointed by him under clause (b) of sub rule (1) of Rule 70 of the Rules, within the time prescribed by him.
As per the proceedings dated 20.03.2013, three nomination papers were submitted by respondent No.7, petitioner and one Smt.
Gayatri Kadam.
It has been recorded in the proceedings that respondent No.7 was proposed by Smt.
Suchitra Chawla and seconded by Ashok Rao.
Smt.
Gayatri Kadam, who returned from ward No.8, was proposed by one Kumar ViNo.2013.07.05 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.7135 of 2013 [4].***** Promila Bhargav but was not seconded by anyone and the petitioner was neither proposed not seconded by any member of the Council.
Therefore, the Returning Officer rejected the nomination papers of the petitioner and Smt.
Gayatri Kadam and since respondent No.7 was left alone in the fray, there was no alternative but to declare her as President of the Municipal Council, Rewari, unanimously.
Aggrieved against the election of respondent No.7, the present petition has been filed in which the petitioner has alleged mala fides against respondent Nos.5 and 6.
He has submitted that respondent No.5 has been brought in place of Shri I.P.Bishnot on the eve of election of the President as he did not succumb to the pressure of respondent No.6 who happened to be the MLA from Rewari and the Minister in the Government of Haryana.
He has also alleged that otherwise there was no occasion for replacing Shri I.P.Bishnot who was the earlier Returning Officer.
After notice was issued in this case, the Court had directed production of record in a sealed cover, which has been opened in the Court today in order to find out as to whether the nomination paper filed by the petitioner is in proper form much-less the fact whether she has been proposed and seconded by any member of the Council or not.
The petitioner could not deny her signatures over the nomination form but she insisted that there has been bungling in the election process at the instance of respondent No.6.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondents submit that the grievance of the petitioner is ill-founded because there was no-one to Kumar ViNo.2013.07.05 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.7135 of 2013 [5].***** propose or second her name, otherwise she would have at least fill their names in the nomination paper.
It is also pointed out that even in the writ petition, neither there is any reference of the persons who were proposer or seconder at that time who were not allowed by the respondent Nos.5 and 6 to put their names on the nomination paper.
No affidavit of any Member of the Council is brought on record in support of the petitioner who wanted the petitioner to contest the election of the office of President.
I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings as well as the record and of the considered view that in terms of the instructions issued by the State Election Commission dated 17.04.2003, the election of the President and Vice President of the Municipal Council/Committees is regulated by filing the nomination paper on a printed format which is required to be proposed and seconded by two members of the Municipal Council/Committee.
In the present case, after perusal of the nomination paper of the petitioner, I have found that she has neither been proposed not seconded by any Member of the Council, meaning thereby she was not a favourite amongst the Members of the Council for the post of President not the petitioner has mentioned the names of those Members who were with her on 20.03.2013 and were sidelined because of undue influence exercised by respondent Nos.5 and 6.
In view of the factual position emerged from the pleadings and the record, I am of the considered opinion that the grievance raised by the petitioner is totally unwarranted as her nomination paper was lacking Kumar ViNo.2013.07.05 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.7135 of 2013 [6].***** material requirement and has rightly been rejected.
Moreover, it is not the petitioner alone whose nomination paper was rejected, rather there was one more candidate, namely, Smt.
Gayatri Kadam whose nomination paper was rejected because she was only proposed and not seconded.
Thus, respondent No.7 was left alone in the contest and as there was no need of any polling in his favour, she was elected unanimously.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition and hence, the same is hereby dismissed.
Before parting with the order, the Registry is directed to return the record summoned from the office of Deputy Commissioner, Rewari, in a sealed parcel.
July 04, 2013 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge