High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 12 P&H CK 0144

Parveen Rani vs State of Haryana and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 20 December 2010 · Citation: (2011) 2 RCR(Civil) 823

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Singh, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
CWP No. 15048 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 322 words

Alok Singh, J.

1.The sole question involved in this petition is as to whether Respondent No. 5, who was elected from the ward reserved for the scheduled caste

category, shall be eligible to contest and elected as President of the Municipal Committee, which is reserved for the scheduled caste women

category?

2.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has vehemently argued that since Respondent No. 5 was not elected from the ward reserved for scheduled

caste women category, hence is not eligible to be elected for the post of President, which is reserved for the scheduled caste women category.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further argued that since Petitioner is only candidate who contested and elected as member from the ward,

which was reserved for the scheduled caste women category, hence Petitioner is alone eligible to be elected as President of the Municipal

Committee, the post which is reserved for scheduled caste women category.

3.

The issue raised in the present petition is no more res integra. Hon''ble Apex Court in the matter of Kasambhai F. Ghanchi Vs. Chandubhai D.

Rajput and Others, has held as under:

Therefore, the Appellant who belongs to the Backward Class was eligible to stand for the office of President even though he had been elected as a

member of the municipality not from a reserved seat but from a general seat. As per the roster it is a Backward Class member who in the year

1997 was to be the President of the Jambusar Municipality. The Appellant, who admittedly belongs to a Backward Class could not be regarded

as being ineligible merely because he had not been elected to a seat which had been reserved for a Backward Class candidate. Consequently his

election as the President, on this ground, could not have been set aside.

4.

In view of the dictum of the Apex Court, question raised in the present petition stands answered.

Accordingly petition is dismissed.