Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sau. Soni w/o. Gajanan Kurkute, was elected as a member of the Village Panchayat, Taroda, on 23 April 2015, having polled 294 votes against 280 votes polled by respondent No. 2, Sau. Nanda w/o. Ganesh Khandale. Respondent No. 2 filed an Election Petition under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, seeking disqualification of the petitioner on the ground that she was less than 21 years of age. The trial Court partly allowed the election petition and set aside the petitioner's election. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The petitioner argued that the election petition was exclusively restricted to the ambit of Section 15, which deals with corrupt practices, and that there was no allegation of any corrupt practice in the entire memo of the election petition. The petitioner contended that Section 15(5)(a)(b) defines the scope and jurisdiction of the trial court in interfering with the result of an election, and unless a judge finds any corrupt practice having been committed by the elected person or by any person known or unknown to the elected candidate, the election could not be set aside. The petitioner further argued that corrupt practices are defined under Section 16(6)(a,b&c) read with the first proviso and three explanations, which make it clear that a dispute as regards age of a candidate cannot be a subject matter of an election petition under Section 15. The Court, after hearing the submissions, allowed the writ petition, set aside the judgment and order of the trial Court, and dismissed the election petition. The Court held that the election petition under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, is confined to corrupt practices and does not permit a challenge on the ground of the candidate's age.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Scope of Election Petition under Section 15 - Corrupt Practices - The issue was whether an election petition under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, can be filed solely on the ground of age disqualification without alleging corrupt practice. The Court held that Section 15(5)(a)(b) read with Section 16(6) confines the jurisdiction of the trial court to cases involving corrupt practices, and a dispute regarding age does not fall within the ambit of an election petition under Section 15. (Paras 3-5) B) Election Law - Disqualification on Ground of Age - Not a Ground for Election Petition - The Court held that the age of a candidate is not a ground for setting aside an election under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, as the section is restricted to corrupt practices. The election petition was therefore untenable. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an election petition under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, can be maintained on the ground that the elected candidate was less than 21 years of age, in the absence of any allegation of corrupt practice.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The judgment and order dated 22.8.2016 passed by the trial Court in Election Petition No.1/2015 is set aside. The election petition stands dismissed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Election petition under Section 15 of Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act
- 1958 is limited to corrupt practices as defined under Section 16(6)
- age of candidate is not a ground for setting aside election under Section 15
- Section 15(5)(a)(b) defines scope of interference by trial court
- corrupt practices defined under Section 16(6)(a
- b
- c) read with first proviso and explanations.
