IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.19105 of 2008 SUMANTI DEVI, wife of Sri Surendra Sah, resident of village Wefapur Sharma, P.O. Sirsha Biran, P.S. Lalganj, District Vaishali. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.Urmila Devi wife of Jagdish Thakur alias Jagdish Sharma, resident of village Sirsa Biran, P.S. Lalganj, District- Vaishali. 3. Urmila Devi, wife of Surendra Thakur 4. Krishna Devi wife of Sheoji Sahni 5. Krishna Devi wife of Sri Ramashish Sahni 6. Suman Sahni, wife of late Rajendra Sahni 7. Tetari Devi wife of late Rajendra Mahto 8. Parvati Devi wife of Sri Ram Briksh Sah 9. Srimati Manju Devi wife of Sri Bharat Das. All resident of village Sirsa Biran, P.O.Sirsabiran, P.S. Lalganj, District Vaishali. 10. Kanti Devi wife of Dinesh Mahto 11. Nilima Devi, wife of Sri Ashok Sahni Both resident of village Etvarpur Sisaula,P.O.Manikpur Pekari, P.S.Lalganj, District-Vaishali. 12. Geeta Devi wife of Sri Hari Thakur 13. Sumitra Devi wife of Mahendra Raut 14. Husna Khatoon wife of Sajad Ali 15. Nashaya Khatoon, wife of Md. Shraja. All resident of village- Sirsa Ram Rai, P.O. Sirsa Biran, P.S. Lalganj, District- Vaishali. 16. Manti Devi wife of Ravindra Sahani 17. Rekha Sahni, wife of Sri Pradip Sahni. Both resident of village Sirsaghati, P.O.Sirsa Biran, P.S. Lalganj, District-Vaishali. 18. The District Collector-cum- Election Officer, Hajipur, Vaishali 19. The Block Development Officer-cum- Block Election Officer, Lalganj(Vaishali) --- For the Petitioner: Mr. Manjeshwar Prasad Sinha For the State : Mr. R.K. Chandra, J.C.to VIII --- 2. 4.2.2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 15.10.2008, by which the evidence of the petitioner-defendant was closed and further seeks quashing of the order dated 19.11.2008 (Annexure-2) passed, in Election Case No.26/2006, by the Civil Judge No.1, Junior Division, Vaishali, by which the petition for recall of the said order was rejected. 2 The petitioner is the elected candidate and defendant No.1 in the Election Case No. 26 of 2006 filed by respondent No.2 challenging her election. It is stated that as many as seven witnesses were examined on her behalf and by order dated 15.10.2008 her evidence has been closed. It is evident from the impugned order dated 19.11.2008 that the matter was fixed for evidence of witnesses of the petitioner on 21.7.2008 but the same not being produced a cost of Rs.100/- was imposed and the matter was fixed for 5.8.2008 but on that date also no witness was examined by her and again a cost of Rs.150/- was imposed upon her. On 14.8.2008 also no witness being produced, her evidence was closed, but subsequently by order dated 21.8.2008, the said order was recalled on payment of Rs.400/- with a clear direction that on every date she shall produce her evidence and/or on failure to do so on any date her evidence would be closed. Thereafter on six dates the witnesses were produced but on 15.10.2008 no witnesses being produced by the petitioner, her evidence was closed. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 19.11.2008 passed by the learned Election Tribunal. Thus, there is no merit in the writ application and it is, accordingly, dismissed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.)