SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad
Puja Kumari – Appellant
Versus
The State Election Commission (Panchayat), – Respondent
CWJC/17961/2021



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17961 of 2021

======================================================

Puja Kumari Daughter of Sajan Chaupal and Wife of Ram Dayal Yadav,

resident of Village - Jhanjpatti, Doman, P.O. Hudra, P.S.- Khutauna, District-

Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel

Path, Patna through the State Election Commissioner.

2.

The State Election Commissioner, The State Election Commission

(Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna

3.

The Secretary, The State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan,

Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

4.

The District Magistrate-cum-District Election Officer (Panchayat),

Madhubani, District- Madhubani.

5.

The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Madhubani, District- Madhubani.

6.

The Block Development Officer, Khutauna-cum-Returning Officer, District-

Madhubani.

7.

The Circle Officer Khutauna, District- Madhubani.

... ... Respondents

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner

:

Mr. S.B.K. Manglam, Advocate

Mr. Awnish Kumar, Advocate

For State Election Commission

:

Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, Advocate

For the Respondent

:

Mr. Ajay ( GP-5 )

Mr. Pratik Kumar Sinha, AC to GA-5

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN

SINGH

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN

SINGH)

Date : 10-05-2022

The petitioner has chosen to file this writ

application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking quashing of an order dated 25.09.2021, passed by the

Block Development Officer, Khutauna-cum-Returning Officer

in the district of Madhubani, whereby the petitioner's

Patna High Court CWJC No.17961 of 2021 dt.10-05-2022

2/6

nomination to contest the election for the post of Mukhia of

Gram Panchayat Raj, Durgipatti came to be rejected on the

ground that the caste certificate enclosed by the petitioner along

with his nomination paper had not been found to be certified in

terms of the report submitted by the concerned Circle Officer.

The petitioner is also seeking a direction from this Court to the

respondent No. 6 in the present writ application to accept the

nomination paper of the petitioner and allow her to contest the

Panchayat Election 2021 for the post of Mukhia of Gram

Panchayat Raj, Durgipatti on the ground that rejection of her

nomination by respondent No. 6 is wholly illegal. There is a

third prayer, seeking direction to the respondent Election

Commission for blacklisting the Block Development Officer

Khutauna and the Circle Officer, Khatauna for their deputation

in the election duty in future as also for their immediate transfer

from their respective posts, since in the presence of the said

respondents, i.e., The Block Developement Officer, Khutauna

and The Circle Officer, Khutauna there was no possibility of

free and fair election.

2.

It is not in dispute that the Gram Panchayat

General Elections in the State of Bihar have already been held

and election results have been announced, including for the post

Patna High Court CWJC No.17961 of 2021 dt.10-05-2022

3/6

of Mukhia of Gram Panchayat, Durgapatti, long back.

3.

In response to a Court's query as to whether this

writ application has become infructuous, Mr. S.B.K. Manglam,

learned counsel for the petitioner has insisted that the first relief,

which has been prayed for on behalf of the petitioner still

survives. He submits that he will not be pressing the second

relief as sought for in the present writ application.

4.

Despite this Court's observations, Mr. Manglam has

insisted that this Court must address the issue regarding

rejection by the Returning Officer of the nomination paper filed

by the petitioner to contest the election to the post of M

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top