IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16558 of 2009 1. Kamleshwari Prasad Singh, S/O Late Banarasi Prasad. 2. Jitendra Kumar Yadav, S/o Late Khelan Yadav. Both of Vill.- Pipariya. 3. Gyan Chandra Rai, S/o Late Shital Rai, 4. Madan Tanti, S/o Late Nanka Tanti, 5. Prahlad Yadav, S/o Sri Amrit Yadav, Petitioner nos. 3 to 5 of village - Pipariya Diara, 6. Anil Rai, S/o Bal Kishun Rai, Vill.- Pipariya Kerari. All the petitioners are under Police Station- Pipariya, District- Lakhisarai ……….. Petitioners Versus 1. The Chief Election Commissioner, Nirvachan Bhawan, New Delhi. 2. The Chief Electoral Officer State Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Lakhisarai. 4. The Nirvachak Nibandhan Padadhikari Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. ………. Respondents For the Petitioners : Mr. Gouranga Chatterjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ray Shivajee Nath, A.A.G.-IV. ----------- 6. 21-09-2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State of Bihar as well as learned counsel for the Election Commission and its authorities. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the State in support of the impugned order. 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging order dated 12-06-2009 communicated to the petitioners vide Letter No. 1377 dated 3.11.2009(Annexure-2) by which the District Magistrate (Respondent no. 3) dismissed the application/appeal of the petitioners. 4. From the arguments of the parties as well as the materials on record, it appears that on 02-02-2008 voter list was finally published after objections were filed and when the said 2 objections were not considered the petitioners challenged the said publication vide CWJC No. 16093 of 2008 and the said writ petition was disposed of by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 05-03- 2009 with a direction to the competent appellate authority to consider the representations of the petitioners as appeal under Rule 23 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 and to dispose of the same expeditiously within a period of four weeks from the conclusion of the Parliamentary Elections, 2009. Thereafter, the appellate authority namely the District Magistrate, Lakhisarai rejected the claim of the petitioners vide his impugned order dated 12-06-2009(Annexure-2) against which the instant writ petition has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that some Panchayats under Pipariya Block were part of Lakhisarai Assembly Constituency and some Panchayats of the said block were part of Suryagarha Assembly Constituency, but now the entire Pipariya Block is under the Suryagarha Assembly Constituency as per the Gazette Notification of New Delimitation Commission (Annexure-6). It is also stated that voters of old Booth Nos. 82, 83, 84 and 88 were the voters of Pipariya Gram Panchayat and are still the voters of that Panchayat (Annexure-7) and as such the said booths are still situated in the rooms of Pipariya School which is under Suryagarha Assembly Constituency. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that voters list was revised (Annexure-7 series), whereafter the voters list was again changed (Annexure-9). It is also averred that if some persons of Pipariya has shifted to Khutaha 3 (Barahiya Block of Lakhisarai Assembly Constituency), their earlier booths in another constituency cannot be shifted to Barahiya under Lakhisarai Assembly Constituency. It is also averred that only Malpur village has been shifted from Pipariya & Khutaha Block in 1994, but petitioners did not come in Malpur village. Learned counsel for the petitioners further asserted that the concerned petitioners were voters of Pipariya in the last Assembly Election of 2005 and the same was the condition in the PACCS election and Gram Panchayat Election. List of villages under the Lakhisarai Assembly Constituency has also been provided (Annexure-10). Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the impugned order has been passed by the appellate authority without considering the materials on record which clearly proved the claim of the petitioners. 6. Form the facts and circumstances of the case as well as from perusal of the earlier order of this court and the impugned order of the appellate authority, it is quite apparent that the said authority has rejected the claim of the petitioners on some points but he has not at all considered the materials on record, which were relied upon by the petitioners, although as per directions of this court, the appellate authority should have decided the matter in accordance with law after considering the pleadings and evidences of both the parties. 7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, without going into the details on merits of this case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the said appellate authority to consider 4 the matter afresh in accordance with law as per the above observations. To facilitate full, proper and appropriate decision by the said appellate authority, the impugned order dated 12.06.2009(Annexure-2) is hereby quashed. If a copy of this order and a copy of the writ petition along with its annexures are produced by the petitioners within 15 days from today before the said appellate authority, the said appellate authority shall give a liberty to both the sides to place their pleadings and evidences so that the matter may be decided expeditiously by the said authority preferably within a period of six months in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order. Sujit (S.N.Hussain,J.)