IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10562 of 2007 BALI RAM RAI, son of late Hari Ballabh Rai, resident of Village Kuber Chak, Dhandiha, PS Koilbar, District Bhojpur ……… ………. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR , through Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna 2. The State Election Commission through Secretary, Bihar, Patna 3. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur …… Respondents ----------- 03- 14.5.2009 Heard Mr. D K Tandon for the petitioner, learned Assistant Counsel to AAG V for respondent nos. 1 and 3, and Mr.Rajiv Lochan for respondent no.2. This writ petition in the nature of public interest litigation has been preferred for a direction to respondent no.2 to enforce the decision of this Court which is to the effect that a voter of a particular Panchayat can contest an election in the Panchayat and not outside the Panchayat. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. It appears that respondent no.2 was earlier allowing voters of a different Gram Panchayat that one can contest election for the post of Mukhia etc. in any Gram Panchayat even though he was a voter in a different block. Such action of respondent no.2 was challenged before this Court in CWJC No.7757 of 2006 (Shailendra Pratap Singh vs.State of Bihar & Ors.), which was allowed by a learned single Judge by his judgment dated 30.4.2007, since reported in 2007(3) PLJR 204, wherein it has been held that voter of a particular Gram Panchayat can alone contest in any post, and not a voter of a different Gram Panchayat. Respondent no.2 herein had challenged the same by preferring LPA - 2 - No.488 of 2007 (The State Election Commission & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors.) and the analogous appeal, bearing LPA No.441 of 2007 (Surendra Kumar vs. State of Bihar & Ors.). By order dated 23.3.2009, the appeals were dismissed, and the order of the learned single Judge has been upheld. After dismissal of the appeals, respondent no.2 has issued fresh guidelines bearing letter no.680, dated 24.4.2009 for due observance and implementation of the aforesaid orders/directions of this Court forthwith which renders this writ petition infructuous. (A copy of the said order dated 24.4.2009 has been supplied by learned counsel for respondent no.2 during the course of submission. Let the same be kept on record.) 3. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as having become infructuous. ( S K Katriar ) ( Kishore K. Mandal) mrl