Back
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
TASMINA KHATUN and153 othrs – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHRS – Respondent
ORDER :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners; Ms. S. Baruah, learned Central Government Counsel [CGC] for the respondent no. 1; Ms. S. Kataki, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India [ECI] for the respondent nos. 2, 4 & 6; and Ms. U. Das, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 & 10.
2. The petitioners, 154 in nos., have joined together to institute the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India stating that they have a common cause of action to espouse.
3. The petitioners have stated that they are residents of villages adjacent to each other, namely, No. 3 Rajapukhuri, Saharia Pam, Gelajan, Naojan, No. 2 Dalanipathar, Dalanipathar, Madhyapathar, under Uriamghat, District – Golaghat, Assam. The petitioners have stated that for a long period of time, they have been casting their votes in both State Legislative Assembly Elections and/or Parliamentary Elections by virtue of enrolment of their names as voters in the concerned electoral rolls, published from time to time. The petitioners have claimed that they had cast their votes in the previous elections t
The availability of statutory remedies under the Representation of the People Act, 1950 restricts the maintainability of a writ petition regarding electoral roll inclusion.
The right to a hearing before deletion from electoral rolls is fundamental; statutory remedies under the Representation of the People Act must be followed prior to court intervention.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
