Civil Writ Petition No.1957 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1957 of 2010 Date of Decision:21.03.2011 Balkar Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus State Election Commissioner, Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Rajeshwar Singh Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Sartaj Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Mr.K.S.Sidhu, Advocate, for respondent No.5. *** Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.(oral) Succinctly, the facts, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, are that Balkar Singh(petitioner No.1) made a complaint to the State Election Commissioner, Punjab(respondent No.1) and requested to delete the names of the voters mentioned in the voter list at serial No.878 to 894(Annexure P-1) relating to the year 2007 of Part No.18 of 098 Dharamkot assembly constituency of village Malluwala, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur. 2. In the wake of complaint, respondent No.1 sought the reports from the filed officers in this regard. The Tehsildar, Zira(Respondent No.4) submitted the report(Annexure P-2) to the Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum-Electoral Registration Officer(respondent No.3), who forwarded the same vide report (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.1 and accordingly recommended the change. Civil Writ Petition No.1957 of 2010 2 Thereafter, respondent No.1 sought some clarification from respondent No.3 vide letter dated 04.04.2008(Annexure P-4) and in pursuance thereof, respondent No.3 sent the letter dated 18.04.2008(Annexure P-5). A direction was stated to have been issued by this Court to respondent No.1 to consider the report(Annexure P-5) in Civil Writ Petition No.7106 of 2008 by virtue of order dated 30.04.2008 (Annexure P-6). 3. Consequently, in pursuance of the order of respondent No.1, respondent No.3 by way of order dated 07.05.2008(Annexure P-7) deleted the votes from 183 to 188 and 235 to 247 from the voter list of village Amargarh Bandian and enlisted in the voter list of the village Malluwala. 4. The case of the petitioners further proceeds that in view of the appeal filed by one Gurmukh Singh Sandhu(respondent No.5), respondent No.1 again sought and respondent No.3 sent another report dated 16.05.2008(Annexure P-8) to respondent No.1. Respondent No.5 filed another writ petition bearing CWP No.9434 of 2008, which was disposed of by this Court by means of order dated 25.09.2008(Annexure P-9) and the direction was issued to respondent No.2 to decide his representation. The representation dated 03.03.2009(Annexure P-10) filed by him(respondent No.5) was accepted by respondent No.1 on the report (Annexure P-11) of respondent No.4 and the report(Annexure P-12) of respondent No.3, vide impugned order dated 15.12.2009(Annexure P-13). 5. The petitioners still did not feel satisfied and preferred the instant writ petition, challenging the impugned order dated 15.12.2009(Annexure P-13), invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. That is how, I am seized of the matter. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable assistance and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant writ petition in this context. Civil Writ Petition No.1957 of 2010 3 7. Ex facie, the argument of the learned counsel that since respondent No.1 has wrongly ignored the earlier reports(Annexures P-2 and P-3) of respondent No.4 and respondent No.3 and illegally accepted their subsequent reports(Annexures P-11 and P-12), so the impugned order(Annexure P-13) is arbitrary and illegal, is not only devoid of merit but misplaced as well. 8. What is not disputed here is that the petitioners made a complaint to respondent No.1 to enlist the indicated votes relating to the year 2007 in the voter list pertaining to Dharamkot assembly constituency of village Malluwala, District Ferozepur, which have been included in the list of Amargarh Bandian, Annexure P-1. In the wake of order(Annexure P-9) of this Court, the representation (Annexure P-10) filed by respondent No.5, respondent No.1 after taking into consideration the various reports of the field officers, made the correction by virtue of impugned order(Annexure P-13) . 9. It is not a matter of dispute that the elections of Gram Panchayats of both the villages have already been completed under the Act on the basis of previous voter lists in the year, 2008. The change by way of inclusion and deletion of the voters in the indicated voter list cannot possibly be effected at this belated stage after completion of election process. Moreover, respondent No.1 has discussed the reports of the field officers and directed the inclusion of the names mentioned therein in the voter list of Gram Panchayat Amargarh Bandian, vide impugned order(Annexure P-13). Therefore, no legal ground for interference in the impugned order(Annexure P-13) is made out in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 10. Be that as it may, even If the petitioners are still aggrieved by such inclusion or deletion, they would be at liberty to file fresh objections to the next revision of electoral roll (voter-list) at the relevant time of next election. 11. No other legal point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the learned counsel for the parties. Civil Writ Petition No.1957 of 2010 4 12. In the light of aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed as such. 13. Needless to mention here that if the petitioners submit the fresh objections-petition to the revised electoral roll(voter-list), the same would be independently decided by respondent No.1, without being influenced in any manner by impugned order(Annexure P-13) and in accordance with law. March 21, 2011 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) seema Judge