IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18284 of 2010 ASHUTOSH KUMAR, SON OF PRAVEEN PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DHAN SINGARA, TOLE -TEJA BIGHA, P.O. TEJA BIGHA, P.S. KHIJARSARAI, DISTRICT GAYA, PRESENTLY CONTESTING THE ENSUING ASSEMBLY ELECTION FOR BIHAR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AS AN INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE FROM 233, ATARI ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA…..PETITIONER. VERSUS 1. THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA THROUGH THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER, NIRVACHAN SADAN, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISIONER, THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, NIRVACHAN SADAN, NEW DELHI. 3. THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER, BIHAR, PATNA, MANGLES ROAD, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER, GAYA, DISTRICT GAYA. 5. THE RETURNING OFFICER, 233, ATARI ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY, DISTRICT GAYA…….RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 04.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Election Commission of India and its authorities. This writ petition is being finally heard at this stage at the instance of learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 25.10.2010 (Annexure-1) issued by the Returning Officer of 233, Atari Assembly Constituency in the district of Gaya (respondent no.5) changing the election symbol allotted to the petitioner on 25.10.2010 and also for a direction to the respondents authorities to print ‘Spoon’ as the election symbol of the petitioner on the Electronic Voting Machine likely to be used for holding the said election. The claim of the petitioner is that in Form-3A he gave - 2 - option of symbol for him with ‘Spoon’ as his first choice and ‘Ring’ as his second choice and on 25.10.2010 the Returning Officer allotted symbols to all the candidates, out of which petitioner was allotted ‘Spoon’ symbol but when he went to the Sub-Divisional Office on 29.10.2010 he was informed that the impugned letter was issued changing his symbol to’ Ring’. From the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it is quite apparent that two options were given by the petitioner out of which ‘Spoon’ was the first option and ‘Ring’ was the second option. Admittedly ‘Spoon’ is not among the free symbols to be allotted to the candidates and hence vide impugned order dated 25.10.2010 (Anexure-1) the Returning Officer specifically informed that since ‘Spoon’ was not one of the free symbols to be allotted to the candidates, the second choice of the petitioner, namely ‘Ring’ symbol was allotted to the petitioner as his election symbol. In the said circumstances, this court does not find any illegality in the said order of the authorities concerned and accordingly this writ petition is dismissed. However, dismissal of this writ petition will not affect any election petition if filed by the petitioner or anyone else. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)