IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7446 of 2011 1. KAMESHWAR DUBEY, S/o Sri Indrasan Dubey 2. Sanjay Dubey, S/o Sri ram Narayan Dubey 3. Radheshyam Dubey, S/o Sri Sudershan Dubey - All R/o Village Manipur, PO Doiyan, PS Dinara, District Rohtas ...... Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION through its Secretary, Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 2. The State Election Commissioner, State Election Commission, Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 3. The Secretary, State Election Commission, Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Rohtas cum District Election Officer, Rohtas 5. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram 6. The Block Development Officer, Kochas Block, Kochas, Rohtas 7. Sri Ram Dhani Singh, S/o name not known to the petitioner, MLA from Karaghar Assembly constituency, Bihar Vidhan Sabha Bhawan, Patna ......Respondents ----------- 02- 27/4/2011 Heard Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey for the petitioners. Mr. Rama Shankar Pradhan for respondent nos. 1 to 3, and learned Assistant Counsel to SC 11 for respondent nos.4 to 6. In the instant writ petition which is in the nature of a public interest litigation, the petitioners raise a grievance with respect to shifting of polling booth of village Manipur, from Manipur to village Kursha falling under Kanjar Gram Panchayat, Block Cochas, in the District of Rohtas. The petitioners submit that both in the Parliamentary as well as Assembly elections, the polling booth for Manipur village was situated in village Manipur itself. It is further submitted that at the instance of the local MLA, the booth has been shifted to village Kursha in violation of the direction of State Election Commission. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it 2 appears that the matter relates to shifting of booth from one village to another village. It further appears that the petitioners have already filed representation before respondent no.1, the State Election Commission. In view of the nature of the reliefs sought, we are of the view that petitioners, if so advised, may file a detailed representation afresh before respondent no.1, who shall look into the matter and pass an order within a reasonable time. 3. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. ( S K Katriar ) ( S P Singh ) mrl