SOM LAL versus VIJAY LAXMI & ORS.

SOM LAL versus VIJAY LAXMI & ORS.

Disqualifications under Section 11(f) and (g) of Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (Act 19 of 1994), being a later and overriding enactment, prevail for election to Panchayat office; thus, a person holding an office of profit only under a Panchayat, Municipality, or Government is disqualified, not those holding office under a Statutory Corporation or Board. The appellant, as an employee of the Agricultural Marketing Board, was not disqualified and the orders setting aside his election were erroneous.

Parties
Appellant: Som Lal; Respondent: Vijay Laxmi & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal Against High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disqualification From Panchayat Election, Interpretation of Repealing Statutes, Office of Profit, Statutory Interpretation
Election Law Local Government Law Disqualification From Panchayat Election Interpretation of Repealing Statutes Office of Profit Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Som Lal

Appellant

Vijay Laxmi & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal Against High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disqualifications in Section 208 of Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 or Section 11 of Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 apply for election of Sarpanch and membership of Panchayat
  2. 2 Whether holding office in Agricultural Marketing Board disqualifies candidate from Panchayat election under relevant laws

Ratio Decidendi

Disqualifications under Section 11(f) and (g) of Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (Act 19 of 1994), being a later and overriding enactment, prevail for election to Panchayat office; thus, a person holding an office of profit only under a Panchayat, Municipality, or Government is disqualified, not those holding office under a Statutory Corporation or Board. The appellant, as an employee of the Agricultural Marketing Board, was not disqualified and the orders setting aside his election were erroneous.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment and order of the learned Single Judge of the High Court set aside
  • Appellant not disqualified from office of Sarpanch under Section 11 of Act 19 of 1994