Supreme Court Stays Patna HC Judgment Which Allowed Elected Persons Disqualified For Having More Than 2 Children To Continue As Panchayat Members

The Supreme Court recently issued notice in s Special Leave Petition assailing Patna High Court's order allowing three elected persons who were disqualified by the State Election Commission for having more than two children to continue to participate as members of Panchayat. The bench of Justices SK Kaul and MM Sundresh stayed High Court's judgement and said, "In the meantime, the operation of the impugned judgment is stayed but the elected persons will continue to participate as members of the Panchayat." In the present matter, the petitioner had preferred a complaint before the State Election Commission alleging that Saryug Mochi, Vijay Paswan and Punam Devi contested elections of the Ward Councillors of Naubatpur, Patna by giving wrong information regarding their living children. The complaint was filed by referring to the provisions of section 18(1)(m) r/w sec 18(2) of the Bihar Municipality Act, 2007 which disqualified a candidate in local body election if he had more than two living children after the cut off date of April 5, 2008. The Commission heard the petition and reserved the judgment but since it didn't deliver its verdict for more than five months, the petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ. The same was disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to appear before the Commission for rehearing. Since the commission disqualified the three elected members, they approached the High Court and contended that they were not granted sufficient opportunity by the Enquiry Officer. Referring to the judgment in Rajani Kumari v State Election Commission the High Court granted the relief claimed and imposed a cost of Rs 5000 on the State Election Commission. Referring to the principle of law that official documents are reliable in evidence and cannot be brushed aside simply, the petitioner contended that the documents relied upon were official documents based on the information furnished by these three persons only. "The findings of the High Court that these three persons were not afforded the sufficient opportunity of hearing by the Enquiry Officer as the same is not reflected in the order passed by the Commission or specifically not reflected in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Commission, are not only factually contrary to the records including the pleadings filed by these persons before the Commission and also the Enquiry report. It is respectfully submitted that as stated above, only for the first time, unsustainable and baseless contention of none affording then sufficient opportunity is taken in the Writ Petitions," the plea has stated. Advocates Abhay Kumar and Rajat Khatrry appeared for Usha Kaushik. ASG Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the State Election Commission and Advocates Shivam Singh and Kailas Bajirao Autade appeared for the elected officials. Case Title: Usha Kaushik v State of Bihar & Ors| SLP 10563/2022Click Here To Read/Download Order

Supreme Court Stays Patna HC Judgment Which Allowed Elected Persons Disqualified For Having More Than 2 Children To Continue As Panchayat Members

Shruti Kakkar

Tags