•^^^^ HJGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARH.BILASPUR WRIT PETITiON (C V N0.393 of 2010 PETITiONER Kaatik Diwakar, S/o Late Shobharam aged about 74 years, R/o Chandi, P.0. Gondgiri Tehsil Berla Thana Berla District Durg Versus RESPONDENTS 1 State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Rural and Pahchayat development department D.K.S, Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 2 State Election Commission Through Chief Election Officer, Raipur (C.G.) 3 Tehsildar/Returning Officer, gram panchayat Berla, District Durg WRITPETITIONUNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Shri Shailendra Shukla, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.S. Kachhwaha, Dy. Advocate General for the State/respondent No.1 on advance copy. QRALORDER (28.01.2010) SUN8LKUMARSINHA.J. Heard on admission. Petifioner -Kaatik Diwakar has filed this petition under Article 226 ofthe Constjtution of India forthe following reliefs: "10.1 That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to stay the election of the Gram Panchayat Chandi for the post of Sarpanch. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble may kindly be permit the present petitioner to contest the election of the gram panchayat for the post of Sarpanch. 2 Y^ WRIT PETJTION (C } N0.393 of 2010t 10.3 That, any other relief which this Hon'ble court deems fit. 10.4 Cost of the petition." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed his nomination for contesting the election for the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Chandi, Tehsil Berla, District Durg (C.G.), but, his nomination paper has b^en iltegaily rejected by the Returning Officer. Since the election process is going on and the matter appears to be a subject matter of election petition, I am not inclined to entertain this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of india. The writ petition, therefore, fai!s and the same js dismissed summarily. However, it Is observed that the petitioner shatl be at liberty to file an appropriate petition at the appropriate stage before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. Sd/- SunH Kumar Sinha judge