IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 41 of 2011 (PIL) Nirdosh Panwar ….…… Petitioner Versus The State of Uttarakhand and others ……….Respondents Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Chief Standing Counsel for the State / respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Advocate for respondent No. 4. Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Advocate for respondent No. 5. Date of Judgment: 27.05.2011 JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (ORAL) In the writ petition, petitioner is seeking Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate alleged irregularities, said to have been committed by respondent No. 3 in the election of Adhyaksh, Zila Panchayat, Hardwar. The fact remains that the petitioner, as a voter of a particular Panchayat, was entitled to elect a member. The voters of the Panchayat where the petitioner resides, including the petitioner, elected a member. In the petition, it is being contended that despite that member and others, having had chosen to elect somebody else, by alleged irregularities committed by respondent No. 3, respondent No. 4 has been shown to have been elected as Adhyaksh, Zila Panchayat. The contention that the votes casted by the elected members had not been appropriately taken into account by the Election Officer, can only be urged by a member, who thinks in that manner, and if he thinks in that manner, law requires that he must approach the authority prescribed in the Statute. Petitioner never had nor has any locus standi to file the writ petition and to contend what has been highlighted above. 2. The writ petition is not only without any merit, but has been filed with oblique motive and to bring to a rest the democratic set up established in the country by the Constitution of India. 2 3. We, accordingly, dismiss this writ petition with costs of ` 20,000/- to be recovered by the State. (Servesh Kr. Gupta, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 27.05.2011 27.05.2011 Amit