Pawan v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

[2026:RJ-JD:52649-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 24025/2026
CNR: RJHC010994702026 | URN: CW / 41466U / 2026

Pawan ----Petitioner
Versus
(1) State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat Raj, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. (2) District Election Officer (Collector), Panchayat, Jodhpur. (3) Election Registration Officer (Sub-Division Officer), Luni, District Jodhpur. ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s): Mr. Moti Singh.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Ravindra Jala.

[NyayVidhan notes: Stored from the official Rajasthan High Court PDF of the order (hcraj file 206800240252026_4.pdf, 3 pages, uploaded 28.10.2026). (1) The paragraph numbers 1-8 are the Court's own. (2) The cause title is abridged: the petitioner's parentage, age and address are omitted, and the respondents' numbers are shown as (1)-(3). (3) The order prints no 'Reportable' mark. (4) The text is otherwise as printed, including 'Jammu and Kashmir National Conference & Anr' (paragraph 3), 'the same has been correctly added' (paragraph 4), 'not ordinarily residents of that place' (paragraph 6) and 'the Rule 21A' (paragraphs 4 and 7). The persons named in paragraph 4.7 of the writ petition are not named in the order. Page furniture (running heads, page numbers, upload/download stamps, the staff lines and the TCPDF line) is removed. The PDF is authoritative.]

[Source: Rajasthan High Court, hcraj.nic.in — order dated 27.10.2026.]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA

Order

27/10/2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition in the public interest has been filed with the prayer that the names of certain persons, mentioned in Para 4.7 of the writ petition, have wrongly been added in the electoral roll of Gram Panchayat Circle, Sant Nagar, Panchayat Samiti, Luni on the basis of the forged rent agreement issued in their favour and therefore, their names may be ordered to be deleted from the said electoral roll.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even as per the report of the Inquiry Officer, the persons named in Para 4.7 of the writ petition are the ordinary residents of Mangal Nagar. Despite this fact, their names have been added in the electoral roll of Gram Panchayat Circle, Sant Nagar. He further submits that Rule 21A of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1994') does not bar the Courts from passing orders, in case, the irregularity or illegality is pointed out to the Court. In support of his contention aforesaid, learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Union Territory of Ladakh & Ors. Vs. Jammu and Kashmir National Conference & Anr reported in 2023 INSC 804. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the names of the persons mentioned in Para 4.7 of the writ petition may be deleted from the Gram Panchayat Circle, Sant Nagar.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State while vehemently opposing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the names of the persons mentioned in Para 4.7 were recorded in electoral roll of Patwar Circle, Sant Nagar of Gram Panchayat, Sant Nagar on their own application and, therefore, the same has been correctly added in the Gram Panchayat, Sant Nagar. He further submits that a public notice for the elections for the post of Panch and Sarpanch in the Panchayat Samiti election has already been issued on 13.10.2026 under Rule 58 of the Rules of 1994 and, therefore, as per Rule 21A of the Rules of 1994, no amendment, transposition or deletion of any entry can be made for the inclusion of the name or deletion of the same in the electoral roll. He, therefore, submits that the prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be granted in view of the Rule 21A of the Rules of 1994.

5. We have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the relevant record of the case.

6. The controversy involved in the present case is with respect to addition of the names of the persons mentioned in Para 4.7 of the writ petition in the electoral roll of Gram Panchayat Circle, Sant Nagar, although they are not ordinarily residents of that place. As per the report, the persons mentioned in Para 4.7 of the writ petition are ordinarily residing at Mangal Nagar, however, in view of the notification issued on 13.10.2026 under Rule 58 of the Rules of 1994, no deletion or amendment can be made in the electoral roll issued by the respondents.

7. In view of the Rule 21A of the Rules of 1994, we find no force in the present writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed.

8. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

(CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J