of”WWmwgag a§@m%§ f EN THE HIGH CGURT OF CHEATTISGARH ATBILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No.3?‘3 /2011 X, PETITIONER Khemraj Lodhi, aged about 40 ysars, S/o Shyamrath V€rma, R/o Village Sahaspur, Dalli, Post Baisatra, Tahsil and Distt. Rajnandg'aon VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Kamleshwar Vermay R/o Vi11age Jogi Dalli, Post Bhaisatra, Tahsil and Distt. Rajnandgaon 2. Janak Maharaj, Village Kauhakuda, Post Singarpur, Tahsil And Distt. Rajnandgaon 3. Janiklal Banjare, Village Markatola, Post. Mahrumkala Tahsil Khairagarh Distt. Rajnandgaon 4. Devsingh Rajput, Village Patthrs, Post Mandee, Tahsil Khairagarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon Parmanand Sahu Village Baldevpur, Post Baldevpur, Tahsil Khairagarh distt. Rajnandgaon Loknath Sahu, Village Kursipar, Post. Bhataparkala, Tahsil Dongargarh Distt. Rajnandgoan Smt Sakuntala, Nathmal Jain Village and Post Mudipar, Tahsil Khairagarh, Distt Rajnandgaon Shivram Sinha Village Sarampur, Post Chicola, Tahsil Khairagarh, Distt. ’ Raj nandgaon Shi‘tal Jain, Village Bandarpur, Pest Dhara, Tahsil Khairgarh distt. Rajnandgaan 10 Sampat Parak, Village Mahrumkala, Post. Mahrunkala Tahsil Khairagarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon Sarangdev Singh, Village Bhadakala, PGSt Baidevpur, Tahsil Khairgarh Distt. Rajnandgaon 12 Returning Officer, Jila Panchayat Area No. 8, Distt. Rajnandgaon 1 3. Director, Panchayat, Raipur. WRI'E‘ PETITION UNDER ARTECLE 226 AND 227 QF THE CONSTITUTEQN @F INDEA $ Q a #5, &‘/‘\ HIGH COURT OF CHHA'ITISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0. 3739 of 2011 PETITIONER : Khemraj Lédhi. VERSUS y RESPONDENTS : Kamleshwar Vanna & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. I Present: Shri Pamg Kotecha, Advocate for the petitioner. Shn’ Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. ‘ ORDERQORALL (Passed on 14 day ofJuly,2011) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Election Tribunal to decide the election petition Within a stipulated pen'od. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the election petition was filed on 08.03.2010. The proceedings are going on, however, till date, issues have not been Eamed and the case has not been finally decided. 2. On perusal of the documents, it is found that hearing of the election petition is going on regularly but the case could not proceed on account of one or the other reason and as such, no direction of the above nature can be issued. Even otherwise, the High Court should restrain itself horn monitoring the proceedings ofthe Election Tribunal, when there is no allegation of malatide or violation of any rules or regulation. 3. The petition is devoid ofmerit and is accordingly dismissed. /i/ r / / sdl— _ . K.Asm"““‘ Judge u i .i- Satish i \ i Amit