Pinky Devi vs Kunwar Singh & Others

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

By means of this Writ Petition, petitioner has challenged the order dated 31.08.2021 passed by Prescribed Authority/S.D.M., Vikas Nagar, District Dehradun in Election Petition No. 08 of 2019-20.

Petitioner contested election for the Office of Gram Pradhan and he was declared to be elected. Respondent No. 1, who lost in the said election, filed an Election Petition against the petitioner. In the said Election Petition, petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. Learned Prescribed Authority passed an order on 29.06.2021 providing that disposal of petitioner's application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. would not be proper at this stage and the same shall be considered after evidence and after framing of an additional issue.

Petitioner challenged the said order by filing Civil Revision No. 39 of 2021, which is still pending. Petitioner is aggrieved by subsequent order dated 31.08.2021, whereby learned Prescribed Authority has closed petitioner's opportunity to file written statement on the ground that despite last opportunity granted to the petitioner earlier, he failed to file any written statement.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had moved an application, seeking more time for filing written statement, but, no order has been passed on the said application.

Learned counsel for respondent no. 1 submits that a Co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 30.07.2021, passed in WPMS No. 1470 of 2021, had directed the Prescribed Authority to conclude the proceedings of the Election Petition within nine months, and as the petitioner was using dilatory tactics to delay disposal of the Election Petition, therefore, Prescribed Authority was justified in closing petitioner's opportunity to file written statement.

Section 131 (6) of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016, provides the remedy of revision against order passed by Prescribed Authority in an Election Petition, which reads as under:-

"S. 131. (6) Any party aggrieved by an order of the prescribed authority upon an application under sub-section (1) may, within thirty days from the date of the order, apply to the District Judge for revision of such order or any one or more on the following grounds; namely : -

(a) that the prescribed authority has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law;

(b) that the prescribed authority has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested;

(c) that the prescribed authority has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity."

It is not in dispute that petitioner has already filed one revision against the order dated 29.06.2021 passed by Prescribed Authority and his revision is pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute that remedy of revision is not available to the petitioner.

Since petitioner has a statutory remedy available to him under Section 131 (6) of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016, therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy with liberty to petitioner to approach the Revisional Court under Section 131 (6) of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016.

Petitioner's counsel submits that petitioner shall file revision within one week. This Court hopes and expects that the Prescribed Authority will not proceed in the Election Petition for a period of one week only.

Let a certified copy of this order be issued today itself.