@ IN THE HIGH GQURT QF CHKgia'TISGARH AT BILaSPUR (C .6.) 2005 TOIT PETIT350N / pawan Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Gangadeen Sahu, aged about 40 years, Resident of Village- Chorbhatti, TahsiI-KuFud, District Dhamatari (C.G.) .^fv^/ w <^y »<%y' »fe ^ jj^-^C'^p VERSUS 1. Lokeshwar Sahu S/o Shri Ram dayal Sahu, Ashwani Sahu S/o Shri Shpbha Ram Sahu, Ghanshyain Sahu S/o Shri Ramcharan Sahu, The petitioner No, 1 to 3 resident a£ Villagp- Chorbhatfi, r tahsil-Kurycl, district-Dhamatari (C.G.) 4. <|^-r—Pafea^(1:ahsildar< Kuirud) . 'Returning cifS.a-cer. ^(®ai»gBg'a£} : ^ tates:il-KH^H®!;%M;ft;^sK.:'^^':^itlEI8siK^: F: ':Dfia^^atr±:(%gt^»^:.'w"^^B^ 'S: .K:. Ra-Ehor '. • 3/6^:"/Sftr±^^ .E^kBeer: Slrigh Ratehore,. . age<d ^afeouls1; 39 years, (Pre«ld-Lpg. ^ QEfgjcer Gram-panchayf• Chorbhatti): ;| K/b Govt. College Dhamatari Diust. DKamatari (C.G.), ;| ^6. C. Ii. Mishra S/o shri Rajaram Mishra, aged about 52 years, (presiding . officer Gram- paochyat - Chbrbfaatti), R/o Aurvedik Chitshalay, iKodegaon B, Dist. Eihamatari; (C. G.) ^ / 0NDER^;•ta«BR'I'I3@EaE WKIT sSETSTIQSS THE^iBlboNS'I'sfiUBtONBifJB'i'iSMSBSS^ osKysvssyssSk 1 SSSSS3SS@i nSSt. Q'EHEa^ . •Sa^CSBSS.'-SSSSIS^^3!SS. OBDER "OR SBDEBES: DIKE@PIONS PE1 -~( XI-HC-78 sn^T?irR-ii* gwsn^TaiiiRi NWCTl SfiHra> 3^''<ii<iid<i, siTn'y'is, Isioi'Hy ^^L^^/os:^. 00 3<1^<'1 4a«h.(lyt^stilliT) ^<T[w:n1?g'3n^T 'i *t onn^ a^aWW,' Shri R.S. Pate! counse! fo| Shri P.P. Sahu counsei fol The petitioner by the inst| Constitution Qf india has cha!!er1 by the Specified Officer - res^ Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj A| petltlon ofthe peSitioner. . Afcih Numerous grounds hav' above order including one th| Sarpanch by lot as both the cc|ntest votes and this procedure was adt the invaiid votes were counted irt ofrespondent No,1. Lsarned counse! for the p^ squarely covered by order dated where in the identica! sltuatlor petitioner was.si!owed soleiy before enterina into the merits of faiied to frame issues. He submlt tribuna! has decided the elect without framing the issues on th; and thereby denied hlm the reasi {he disputed issues. .tii<<Ii-i41-i t]iHciT^''te^t<Ri(<ii< ^)3Tl^IT3n^T the petitioner. the respondent. ant petition under Artictes 226/227 of the g6d the order dated 13.10.2005 passsd >ondent. No.8 under section 122 of the dhiniyam 1993 dismlssing the election |3een urged by the petitioner to assaii the fet the respondent No.1 was declared jntestants had secured equal number of t>pted in the absence ofthe petltioner and the category of the vaiid votes in favour ^titioner submits thatthe instant petitlon is |17.4.20'06 passed inW.P. No. 3310/2006 the petition preferred by the eiection c|n the ground that She election tribuna! the dispute raised in the eiection petitlon :|s that in the instant case also the eiection |on petition preferred by the petitioner ^ basis of pleadings of respective partles ijsnable opportunity o' leadlng evidence on ). •Nr 9-' XI-HC-78 ^ HI*1CllS»>*11th <s i '<4i<iici«<,®Tn<i'is,iciciiyy ^Y^..^/..f........^.Fy.^q.20Q ^ 3ll^l ><a«n(<.jctt'i»«^!T) ^i )H:!1 an^rwR-liai (W sn^T ai*< l:lt^ B«IIW?l1tcT3n^T On the other hand learn) though it is true that forma! is^ tribungi but the petitioner was| election petition and ampie opfj eviderice to substantiate the gr| and only after considerjng tfl impugned order the election therefore no prejudice was c; have hearo' c.ounsel for qiiirci'fli iiiCTTffteit'<Rf+di< ^sri^Tsn^r ^d counsel for the respondent submits that issjues have not been framed by the eiection wel! aware of the issues involved in the |>ortunitywas given to the petitioner to lead |3unds raised by him in the election petition |e evidence available on record by the l^etition of the petition was dismissed and au^ed to the petitioner in the instant case. the parties. Rule 11. of THE CHHlATTISGARH PANCHAYATS (ELECTION .1^- PETSTIONS, CORRUPT PRA| MEMBERSHIP) RULES, .1995 (1) Subject to the provi^ shail be enquired into by the accordance with the procedi| Procedure, 1908, to the triai of Provided that it shal! on| make a memorandum of the examined by him. !n view of above, the st have framed issues arising oul upon the parties to lead evideni CTICES AND DISQUALIFICATION FOR brovides as under: lions of these rules, every etection petition specified officer as neariy, as may be, in ire appiicable under the Code of Civil iUitS: !y be necessary for the specified officer to ^ubstance of the evidence of any witness |ecified officer - respondent No.8 ought to of the pleadings of the parties and calied ;e against the issues framed^a^ _, - v 9~v 'lfnmnK^mip XI-HC-78 sn^rwteH; (IW3?I^Tsti*< UIII Itl^l k^ ^^ yy/ »'n»l<TF^qTq» 3;s?'*ii<iig<<, ®Tflwi6,fsieiitfy ^^:^y^(^^ ^R- ^00 311^1 tiaqi ('jc<t^a|i,<r) S^ITW flfgtT STI^T Thus on this ground alo| and the impugned order is liab) is altowed and the impugne'd o^ to the specified officer - resporfden same in accordarice with law aihd as possible, at any rate within receipt of copy of this order. on its own merits. qiiiTci'ifl-i *fitiflTfrtec^<.Ri<<ii<. ^Tsrf^iTsn^sr ie the writ petigon dsserves to be a'lowed |e to be set aside. Accordingly, the petition 1-der is set aside. Matter is remanded back it No.8 with a direction to dispose of the in the light ofthis order.as expeditiously |a period of three months from the date of It is made cle.ar that th^re is no order on th@ merits of the instant election petitjon and jt is open tj? the specified officer to decide this petition Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.