IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1969 of 2007 SHYAMLI DEVI, wife of Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, resident of village Baragaon, PO Dariyapur, PS Sahkund, District Bhagalpur …Opp.Party 1st set -Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Josna Rani, wife of Sri Umesh Prasad Singh, resident of village Saraukh, PO Chand Rampur, PS Sabour,District Bhagalpur…Petitioner-Respondents 1st set 3. Anju Devi 4. Quamrun Nisha 5. Jamila Khatoon 6. Parwati Devi 7. Rinku Devi 8. Shishu Devi 9. Sarojani Devi 10. Sabita Chhaw 11. Seema Devi 12. Block Development Officer, Shakund cum Returning Officer, Gram Panchayat Election, Block Shahkund, District Bhagalpur ……Opp. Party 2nd Set-Respondents ******* 13- 6.5.2010 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha for the petitioner, and Mr. Shivajee Pandey for respondent no.2. The issue pertains to the election to the post of Mukhiya of Dariyapur Gram Panchayat which was held in the month of June 2006. Respondent no.2 herein and the writ petitioner contested the said election. The petitioner was declared duly elected. Aggrieved by the said declaration, respondent no.2 filed Election Petition no.1 of 2006 seeking the following reliefs:- (i) That the court be pleased to hold and declare that Shyamli Devi candidate of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat, Dariyapur, has been wrongly declared as the Mukhiya. (ii) That the court be further pleased to hold and 2 declare that Josna Rani is legally entitled to be elected as Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat, Dariyapur, and there is prima facie case for issuance of direction for recounting. (iii) That the Returning Officer has failed to consider the prayer made by Shyamli Devi for recounting and in hot haste declared the result. (iv) That all such ballot papers used or returned to the government may be collected immediately and necessary direction may be given to the defendant no.2. (v) That any other relief or reliefs may kindly be given to the petitioner as the court thinks just and proper. 2. It appears that one of the reliefs prayed for was that the election petitioner be declared as duly elected Mukhiya. Subsequent to filing of the election petition, an application appears to have been filed on behalf of the election petitioner (respondent no.2), beyond the period of limitation seeking amendments in her election petition. On consideration of the materials on record and after hearing both the parties, the Election Tribunal partly allowed the same. By the said amendment, the other nominated candidates of the said election were also made party respondents to the election petition. Aggrieved by part of the order, the writ petitioner has filed the present writ application. 3 3. The sole objection of the petitioner is that such addition of names of the duly nominated candidates beyond the statutory period prescribed for lodging the election petition is not permissible in law. 4. Mr. Shivajee Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.2, submits before this Court that proper application shall be filed in the court below itself whereby the prayer incorporated in relief no.(ii) of the election petition shall not be pressed. It is contended that the writ petitioner (respondent no.2) shall only seek a declaration to unseat the elected candidate (writ petitioner) in the election petition. We record the said stand. In that view of the matter, we are not called upon to adjudicate the issues referred to by the learned single Judge for our consideration. At the cost of repetition, we record that the election petition shall now only be confined to the prayer(s) excepting the one contained in relief no. (ii) under the head - `RELIEFS’. 5. This application is accordingly disposed of. ( S K Katriar ) ( Kishore K Mandal ) mrl