IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 907 of 2009 Smt.Suman Rawat Wife of Sri Brijmohan Singh Rawat, R/o Village-Bhatunda, Patti-Ghurdorsyun, Tehsil - Pauri, District - Pauri Garhwal, (Uttarakhand). ……. Petitioner Versus (1) District Judge, Pauri Garhwal, (2) Smt.Minta Devi Chauhan Wife of Dr.Digamber Singh Chauhan, Resident of Village-Kota, Patti-Ghurdorsyun, Tehsil - Pauri, District - Pauri Garhwal, Presently residing at near E.T.C. Kotdwara Road, Pauri District-Pauri Garhwal (Uttarakhand). (3) Shri Subhash Kumar Joshi, Returning Officer, Election of Pramukh and Up Pramukh, Block-Pabo, Patti – Ghurdorsyun, Tehsil-Pauri, District-Pauri Garhwal. …….. Respondents …………………………. Sri Pankaj Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner. Date: June 22, 2009. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking mandamus commanding the respondent No.1 to decide the Election Petition No. 71 of 2008, Smt.Suman versus Smt.Minta Devi Chauhan and another pending in the court of District Judge, Pauri Garhwal expeditiously within a period of three months. 2. The facts of the case, in nutshell, are that the petitioner contested the election of Block Pramukh of Block-Pabo (District-Pauri Garhwal) which was held on 05.10.2008. In the said election, the respondent No.2 was declared elected. The election of the respondent 2 No.2 as Block Pramukh, Pabo was challenged by the petitioner by moving an Election Petition in the court of District Judge, Pauri, which was registered as Election Petition No.71 of 2008. It is alleged by the petitioner that the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 put their appearance in the election petition on 12.12.2008 and the case was adjourned for a period of three months and fixed 06.03.2009 for filing written statement by the respondent Nos. 2 & 3. On the said date the respondent No.2 again sought adjournment which was allowed and 20.05.2009 was fixed for filing written statement. On 20.05.2009 written statement was filed by the respondents and 04.08.2009 was fixed in the case. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the dates are being fixed after a period of nearly three months though the election petition is an urgent matter and requires hearing as expeditious as possible by the court below. The provisions of Civil Procedure Code are applicable to the election petition in view of the Rule 40 of the Uttar Pradesh Kshetra Panchayat (Election of Pramukh and Up Pramukh and Election Disputes Settlement) Rules, 1994. The unnecessary delay in disposal of the election petition would frustrate the very purpose of it. 4. The prayer is innocuous, deserves to be accepted. 5. The writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the District Judge, Pauri Garhwal to expedite the hearing of Election Petition No.71 of 2008, Smt. Suman versus Smt. Minta Devi Chauhan and another and decide the same as far as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. (Stay Application No.5001/2009 also stands disposed of accordingly.) (B.S.Verma, J.) 22.06.2009 P.Singh