IN THE HIGH COURT 9F CI‘IHATTISGARH 5 BILéSPUR@D writ Petition No. 3g /2oo1 gamharakh Ns‘/g Deepchand,aged; about 3'0,years, by caste Goud tribal. res‘ident of sECL colony, 01d Mines, Bhat gaon, Thana Pratap Pundist rict sarguja, chhattisgarh. The sub Div'isional.’?‘éfficer (Reve- nue ) ‘ éompetent Autmrity,under sectjpn 122 (1) o‘f Madhya P_radesh g Panchayat R'éj “Adhiniynm )‘surajpur i D;s;t;i¢t sarguja, chhattwiusg'arh. 2 Ramesh $[o gai aged about 27 years by caste chgrva. qccqpatio’h; culti- vation.resident of village Bhatgaon Bastixrhané Pratappur 'rehsil Suraj Pundistrict Sarg‘ijé,chhattisgarh. 3. Amer sai s/o Sandev aged about 21 years. by caste Kanwarg’R/o village EhatQaon,Basti, TEana Pratap Put metric: sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 4.3nt. ”P(hulke‘xj-ya wife of Michel Keirkeéte,aged' 45 years, by casee Oraon,tesident 'of village New Mines,Bhat gaonA‘hana Prat ap Pur Distrct sa‘rguja. chhattiegarh. ,1 5.5m” Manoji ‘Oraon w/a $hri Maan .Sai'aged about. 35 years. by caste W*1- 1 l OraonJt/c Emlipara Bhatgaon,'rhana Eratap Pundisttict Sarguja,c‘Garh° 6.Jaganarayan,‘eon of .Rajju aged about€ I22,ye‘ar’s, byv‘cast‘e Kanwar.resident ‘ of village Bhat>gaon,baste,"rhana. Pratrap Funaistrict Sarguja,c'Garh. acaaooz ; V i 'gm -2- 7. suresh, 80h ofVaamkewa1,aged about 22 years by caste oraon resident of village 01d Mines Bhat gaon,colliery,t hana Bhat gaon, Erat apput, Dist rict sar guj a,chhatt is garh . 8. Sanjay s/o shikhnarayan aged about 23 years, resident of village Bhhattgaon, Old Mines, Doublesto re ,t hana ?rat ap £ur. dist rict Sarguj a chhatt is garb . Smt. Mamkultha wife of Hellarus aged about 35 years, by caste Graon.resident oftahatapare thana Pratap Pur,district Sarguja.€hhattisgarh 1-0. - Returning Officetz, Elock Bhaiyathan (shri B.c.Ekka ) Additional Tehsildar Bhatgaon. "‘rel'is'i‘l surajpur,district Sarguja,c'Garh. WRIT PETITION UNDER Juana-LES 22.6 / 227 or THE eggs-rmvgxon or mDI‘A m'QNOy/Wvi 2m” WTmam Shri P.S.Koshy, G.A. for the tate/ Respondent No. 1. Shli Rajesh Pandey, counsel for respondent klgQ. ’é Respondents No.3 to 10 we not noticed as they are not contesting the election petition which is :pending before respondent No. 1. This is clear fro the order sheet of this Court dated 11. 1.2001. Though this matter is M,W.P.No.243/ 2002 for vacation f stay, on the prayer for the lcained counsel for the paities, iti taken up for disposal. This writ petition is direc ed against the order dated s prayer for permission to 2.1.2001 whereby the petitione adduce additional evidence by e Devariya (Uttar Pradesh) and Dist. Surguja was rejected an whereby on an application move petitioner) amendments were allow listed for hean'ng on Station House O$cer, ‘ g Naib Tahsildar, Bhatgaon, the order dated 3.1.2001 by respondent No.2 (election d ed in the ‘election petition. [@W x g m Ea §j$§§a1 ‘ a w m maxw WW a;W m §m W m1— , ‘ . 16.04.2003 Shri B.D.Guru, counsel for e petitioner. r Mitfij: XI-HCrZE Lqmrw i WW %€IW mavmmtw . .2” Qxamm Having heard learned counael, the Court is of the opinion that the order allowing the amenc.m€nt calls for no interferenca The amendment is ‘in the relief Clause to the eEect that the. {ff election petitioner be declared as :Iected. This relief £0v’vs from the election petition itself. It does not changefhe natum of the case nor will it cause any prejudice to the petitioner whose election is called in question. As regards the challenge to e order rejecting the claim of the petitioner for adducing a ditional evidence, the said rejection is set aside in View of the concession made by learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the said respondent has no objection if the petitioner herein is permitted to adduec the evidence of Naib Tahsildar, Bhatgaon, District Surguja and Station House O$cer, Police Stan‘on Devariya (Uttar Pradesh) subject to condition that it woul ‘ be upon the petitioner herein to secure the presence of the S tion House Ofhcer, Devariya (U.P.) \iGithin a stipulated period. This is acceptable to the V 9.3.. View K‘i—HC-ZZ y‘ wmswwm W ak « @éw Wag wpNOEV/ ~ M? $7.% MEI Em rm a?w “awkw- W learned counsel for the petitioner. is directed that the order rejecting the prayer for adducing evidence is quashed . in person or-ii’t‘h’inugh their counsel should appear before the tiespondent No.1 on 7th May, It is direction that parties recording the additional evidence oi L whom summons may be issued. Station House omcer, Devariya, (U.. responsibility of the petitioner to pen‘od of two months from 7th Me summons may be handed over to service. In case the petitioner fails to produce the Station House Dmcer Within a period of two montk examine him shall stand closed. ‘s The petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Consequently, M.W. P‘ i529 12/ 2003 for urgent hearing stand disposed of. In this View of the matter, it Naib Tahsildar, Bhatgaon to As regards the presence of 3.) is concerned, it will be the get him examined Within a iy, 2003 for which purpose the petitioner for en‘ecting .s from 7.5.2003 his right to 243/2002, 1.A.No.2565/02 & Sd/— P.C-Naik Judge [%‘€’f@& i 2003, on which date, the said Respondent shall fix a date for