A petitioner must adhere to the provisions contained in the Statute and must take the consequences on the failure to abide by the stipulation contained therein: Bombay High Court
A petitioner must adhere to the provisions contained in the Statute and take the consequences on the failure to abide by the stipulation contained therein, this has been observed in the recent matter of Fakira Devram Sansare v. The Collector & Ors. [Writ Petition No.14824 OF 2021], listed Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. The final proceedings of the case were taken place on February 2nd 2022, and the said proceedings were presided by a single judge bench of Justice SMT. Bharati Dangre.
The petitioner contested the elections and came to be elected as a ‘Sarpanch’ of village panchayat from the seat reserved for scheduled category. The candidate, had submitted an affidavit before the Returning Officer while filing of his nomination form and had undertaken to produce the validity certificate within a period of one year from being declared elected, but he did not obtained the validity certificate.
Hence, he incurred a disqualification to continue as a Sarpanch and his election was be deemed to have been terminated retrospectively.
While the case being heard, many landmark judgments of Shankar Raghunath Devre (Patil) v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [2019 (3) SCC 220], Anant H. Ulahalkar & anr. v. Chief Election Commissioner & Ors. [2017 (1) B.C.R. 230] were quoted in order to put emphasize on the pertinent case.
The court also places reliance on Jyoti Basu and other v. Debi Ghosal & Ors. [AIR 1982 SCC 983] where it was held that “Outside of Statute, there is no right to elect, no right to be elected and no right to dispute the election. Statutory creations they are, and therefore, subject to statutory limitation.”
Court, after perusal of facts and evidences, held that “The petitioner, therefore, cannot travel beyond the Statute, which govern his election and on failure to produce validity certificate within period stipulated, he must face the consequences provided by the Statute.” In addition to the above, the court related the case with the principle and held that “In the light of the position of law which has been crystallized to the above effect, the petitioner who has contested the election for reserved seat and got himself declared, must adhere to the provisions contained in the Statute and must take the consequences on the failure to abide by the stipulation contained therein.” “The impugned order passed by the Collector, thereby terminating him from the post of Sarpanch of village panchayat Kanadgaon with retrospective effect, is just and proper and deserves to be upheld.”
Judgment reviewed by Pranav Sharma