IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6285 of 2011 NUZHAT BANO . Versus THE BIHAR STATE ELECTION COMMISSION . ----------- 2. 18.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for the State Election Commission. Learned counsel submits that her name figured in the 2010 Assembly Election voter list but has wrongly been deleted from the voter list prepared in the year 2011 for the Panchayat Election. The Commission has already issued instructions that in such circumstances persons whose name figured in the 2010 voter list be considered appropriately both for purposes of nomination and casting of ballot. The nomination of the petitioner was filed on 14.3.2011. After verification, the list of candidates in Form-7 under Rule 41(6) of the Bihar Panchayat Election Rule, 2006 was published on 14.3.2011 itself. Her name figured in the same. The petitioner was allotted an election symbol also, i.e. “Celling Fan”. Subsequently, by an anti dated order dated 12.3.2011 her nomination has been rejected only on the ground that her name did not figure in the 2011 voter list. Considering the urgency, the matter had been passed over earlier to enable counsel for the 2 Commission to seek instruction. Today he places a copy of a letter dated 15.4.2011 bearing No. 3741 from the Secretary of the Commission to the District Magistrate-cum-District Electoral Officer (Panchayat) at Katihar, seeking information by 18.4.2011 of the grounds why the nomination of the petitioner was rejected. Once the commission itself is in seisin of the matter, there is no occasion for the writ Court to interfere at this stage. Needless to state that if there was no other defect in the nomination of the petitioner, and the allegations of alleged anti dating with regard to the cancellation of the nomination after allotment of election symbol etc. are substantiated in the enquiry, quite apart from the remedies that the petitioner may have before the State Election Commission or in an Election petition as the case may, if so advised, the petitioner shall be at liberty to also pursue remedies appropriately against the person who rejected the nomination contrary to law. Let a copy of the letter dated 15.4.2011 be kept on record. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.) 3