IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13339 of 2008 SADIA ASHRAF WIFE OF MD. MASOOM RAZA, RESIDENT OF KHARAIYA BASTI, WARD NO.11, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.O. & P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT- ARARIA. … PETITIONER. Versus 1. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, BIHAR, PATNA, THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER, STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, SON BHAWAN, R. BLOCK GOLUMBER, PATNA. 2. STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE COLLECTOR, ARARIA. 3. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER-CUM-ELECTION OFFICER, ARARIA, ARARIA NAGAR PARSHAD, ARARIA. 4. ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, SMT. ANJALI JAISWAL, ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, ARARIA, DISTT. ARARIA. 5. SHAHNAZ WIFE OF SAMIUZZAMA, RESIDENT OF KHARAIYA BASTI WARD NO.1, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.0. AND P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA. 6. KHURSHIDA WIFE OF EHTESHAMUL HAQUE, RESIDENT OF KHARAIYA BASTI WARD NO.11, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.0. & P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA. 7. KHODAIJA KHATOON WIFE OF MD. ASHSFAQUE ALAM, RESIDENT OF KHARAIYA BASTI WARD NO.11, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.0. AND P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA. 8. MAHFOOZA WIFE OF HASEEB ANSARI, RESIDENT OF KHARAIYA BASTI WARD NO.11, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.0. & P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA. 9. MURSHADA KHATOON WIFE OF AZAD AHAMAD, RESIDENT OF KHARAIYA BASTI WARD NO.11, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.0. & P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA. 10. RAHIMA WIFE OF SHOIB ALAM, RESIDENT OF KHARAIYA BASTI WARD NO.11, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.0. AND P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA. 11. SHABNAM WIFE OF ASHRAF ALI, RESIDENT OF DAMHAILI BASTI WARD NO.11, WITHIN ARARIA NAGAR PARISHAD, P.O. AND P.S. ARARIA, DISTRICT ARARIA. … OPPOSITE PARTIES. For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Advocate. For the Commission : M/s. R.S. Pradhan (Sr.Advocate) & Sanjeev Nikash,Advocate. For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, S.C.22. ----------- 3. 02.12.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the 2 State Election Commission and also the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 19.7.2008 passed by Sub-Judge, Ist Araria in Election Petition No. 1 of 2007, Annexure-1, whereunder the learned Subordinate Judge has held that he shall first consider the issue of limitation in filing the election petition and thereafter proceed to consider the other issues raised therein. I do not see any illegality in the order as in terms of the provisions of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 the election tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to condone the delay in filing the election petition. Reference in this connection may be made to a recent Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 4.8.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7046 of 2007, wherein it has been held that election tribunal constituted under the Gram Panchayat Act, 2006 with similar provisions does not have any jurisdiction to condone the delay in filing election petition. In the circumstances, the Tribunal is correct in its approach to proceed with the issue of limitation at the first instance. I do not see any merit in the writ petition which is, accordingly, dismissed. Ibrar/- (V.N. Sinha, J.)