^^ ':% INTHEHIGHC^IJICTQii-aiHH^ms6ARH^M ^'W.P.::No.!'?;2-S3':l:y2!C>dS^'".' . '• • '.:::.;;./.' PETniONER .l.^""" REiSPQNaEailTS I^X;/''i^ ^7:, .^" <0yoti Satpati, y/o .Jeewan Satpati, Aged ' aBouf-: 3£> •'yeaxs^ At Pbst Nava^ara (A),, ViHage- Sade- Ha3^ Slock- Pussore/ Tahsil^^ Raigarhfe.G.) VERSUS ;StateiC>f^lihattisgarh/.:./;:.',,y-^:;^.':^^ Thr(:)Ugtt~:I'nncipal,Seci®tary,^ .EanBhayWS'^actal'WeSare, :' ','• D.K;S. Bfaawan, Raipur (£:.<S,). ^w.B. State ElectiohCQmmission,<:<>((»l ThrougU: <3Iuef EleisftQn^Offieer,: Raipur,(C.6.), DistncfRetymingOfGcer, Collectrate Building, Raigarh(C.©.): Retunung OHicer, Block Office - Russore, District - Rai^rh(C.G.). Assistant!Retu.mingQfiicer/ Authorizisd OBicer, ; : . Polling BoottrWQ. 100, ^ Blpck-;Pussc>re,;: ^.''•,. ; •.:;•• District-I?ajgarh.(C.©.). Smt. Leelawafi Gupta, W/Q Shre;3Pi-asad Gupta, - Village- Nayapara (A),. , , Bloek- PHS^ore,', '• . TahsilSElistrict-.Raigarh. ^ WRIT PSTnTOI^ tINBER^AR^ei^^^ :'.CGiNSTHTH^QN.:OF^NIM&.:':..:,':.';?-^ •.?:, The above^riamed^ pefitione^tiumbly^anclrespecdully l);begstosubiiut':as'under:^-. :':i::' \'''t~,'^/' '•^^^ /k ^.y: y /:^:/ ./ •»": ::.-" ^',;<5'.::/. ^ y' :s3? / :^y' -^4- '^s- ^- IBI m B81• ;^;NI m •^i^l Hl• ^asEKSss»'s»sffess^*£3KKKfS^sfsa^sVMf!.--^aeiwSl^*i^^ sn^TWTls'fHr '?^n 3?n??i ^^i<^ ^^- ^^^^i<<)c't<i,''^niy-'fs,^yir<-i^<' ^...^^.^..mis, .3n^sn^F.( TOITW ^{p»3n^F 1-2-20Q5 ©na mention heing maci^ ShmArriit Sharma, coun^el forthe petitioner'. Sh ,V.3/.$.;,AAur*hy, ^i<ifl?ral-i •HTE*icff ^f i^L<n tf^i'^.l'l. ii'stfgifati^n'. /thecawistQkenuRfai'hearing. bepu'ty Adwoco^e Gwwnd foi' ^tf}e resppndents ^No.t To5.., ;/ - Shri B,&»6uru, courisei ^or re^ipndent No.& •HeQpd. ;,:. ':• '.^ • ^s relurn Hasalready b^eh •fUN on behaif cf resDohdents;No:2 $6 5 and rstum has aiso be^n fiied on behaif o'f- rsst>ondent No.6, Ifierefore/ argun^ts heard fj:;r ^mal dispo%l of this writ p^ the admission stagfti*s6l'f. :BY •this. writ . petitign decianrrion of the etection r® whereby respondeht No.6Jia^ the petitioner has <juestioned thfi ult in respect of The post of SarDORch M} SM Pas^ayat K^ispd^ Pussore, • t>istrict Raigdrh been deciared efected ds Sarpanch of the sqid .Panchayat. '. ^ _ The case of^ the petitio^ieF js ^that •t-he eiectipn^ for the .pQST •ef Sgrpanch of ©rom Pcne^ ftaigarh was held on I5 .J^ w^on^t <6 arid jorie^iR^dinf^ voting was ov^, on thesam&ipa)?, ccmntiny^ cind it was omhpunced rthat,;th4.petiti<wer 'her^m has«s^ ^J-^. .^-^ 3^'%l1S;WK wn aii^fgNN' ^^.^TCT^^ffi<) <o,?:Ksiray,( ^M:^ ..m^^. sn^j'TT^^ yo+eS:. whereas, iteSponclen+ ^ wming *o know This,^^^^ ^^ •: • *l<<[<'i<il-1imgt^ft'zt <wit^w ^si^naiBRi..,'' : o.& has secured 3Q3 valiA vo-tes. On petitjoner' mowd" ari -oppljcatjon for recounting o'f the jvotes ^is p^r Rule 80 of •riis i^chayat Nirvachan Niyam, 1995 (her^inaflsr r^f^rt^ tc^ ds 'Ni^ pf 1fte petttioner wws aHbwed^d ^ ^th»;;re^minadfficsr i^ueci^c^untin9.^p[^ne>;ure-P/2w p&tiirig 1 s'tttl'ion^N®^'arid Ann^xur'g-P/3 in pespect of poUvng sto^on No.lOOr^a suS®fwhicht^petiTi6nersecure^305votes^^^^W ttie petitioner- 'werit nsxt A^y to •me biock office; for ob-taining cerfifical®, the' retuwmg;^^officer\')rrFQnT!etf,..the^^ r'e^wndent 'No.S has ,been .ele^-teS. as Sarpanch. On cpming: to know this, /•y-ie petifior^ apprcach^^the Districf Election' Officar: a^ rndda a complaitrit tha* rettirningoffter or Bloek Pussore Jias <OTnoynced wr\^ r^sul*, ^sl^oi^ ^plicdtjen in ftjs r^pect 4hn^xure-fy4 was fflovad^^^ arid the rssuit wttich waS arinoiAt^ by the refcmina(^icer in TQVOUF of the p^tioher was also ap^eai^ v^i^ is AmieM^ef/Q. Jhe ^^rnjhQ^^^^^^^ pefi'rioner on her back aaain |:hanaed the resuit and prepdred fina! result AnHexure-P/3 'nwhidi e petjtioner was ^oiW^^^^^^ ane vote to the responctent N4.6 wbich was dons on the bdck af ~the_ :flsa ^^ '^^14H^eW:l'M-i|<o,^B)c-ll'91y. ....hS.^:...^^........... ^ff^T^'<pi^' (^d^^ sii^i •^ifeih; ^8H •3?l^T spEri^ Ct'.;, "V ^inrt ^tei •HI^I 3 ^rafwftT nra^f'? fe^<f'«^i< •^'affiiHSri^t ;,; petitioiwi-,^ sucii by wrrt of m<m^mus ^ re^ohdents bs directea ^corract^eeleclTOhresylfasi^rjvuleM^^ , • As per rspty of respondeiT(s No.2 to 5, the petitioner tins ^ecurea only 1Q3 votes Ot ^e polling si-dtion No.lOO urtiepeas, resswndenTNo.6 has secur^ 182 v^fes. As thepresidm^ way superviaing -rhe coynting iwa^ infjuenced bY -the petitioner's persons •<md':wi^v'^ re(^^^^^^^^^ presidihg officer issued the countihgslipih^ichlOiSvo'teswer^showntobeccstinfav'ourof'riie petitiorier.'rt'ie matfer wast'eportBej to -t+ie AssistanT Election Officef yi|<asj<hand Russore, CQpy of the so^ire wos forwarded t6 the Oisfrict Etection Officsr and tHe mdtter Station. Thjereafter, i+ie conc^rned returning officer Pussore pWpared a tabulation list readrding potling station 'Nos.99 and 100 ancl preparea. Asperform No.17. 7371 -rflat, 36 votes were invaiic) arid remi valid. As per +he tobuiation list •fhe petitioner secured 302 votes whereas, respondenT No.6 secured 3 election by margin of one vote and.'jhet'eaftepa certificgte of winnin^ candidafe wos issued. Same foicli Annexures-R/1 to R/8. Similar reNrn has been filed on behalf of respondent No.6. |was aiso reportied t<? Wie Police vote exercised by 1+ie pfiople fw •Hiereaftsr', the form No.17 was Votera cast their vbtes <uid out of iiinirig 701 votes wepe founcf to be 03 votes. The pentipRer ibst lfte is evideht from the documents Gt.PRJ—PS/350-12/2000—50,000. SWil r 'SSF^i^ici^ ©^iy'Ka,Tsi<?ii*iy^ 3(1^1 ~^V (I'lt^lS^) an^rqii Isiro (WT SiK^T Wfi Barve c^ 3T^T^ct sn^n'^ .^— Perusai o^-i+iie above fdcts petition ,<md the respphdents in facts ure involved jn this matter. petitioner had secur%cl eounting s regdrding eiection booth No.lQO threat by her persens and report correct position was 1+iat -the 1+ierefore, •rhe two confradictory fesolved pnly by allowing th® connot be done in this writ involvect iri •rtiis miattef', which jurisdiction, ds such th®writ the petitiQner is at liberty to awai undertheslec-i-ion iaw. Wi'tti 'ttle aforesaid Consequently, AA.(W.)P. No| stand dlsposed of. cls observalfon 4>li<id'^*I ^l^flf ^ t^l<il <^l^i< ^? affipt s^a mentioned by the petjtionep in -Hle |their return shows that disputed As per the respondents' retyrn tfae ip show'mg 106 votes in her favour' frem The presiding officer under to that effeet wa3 lodged whereas, (|etitione.r secured onty tG3 votes; stand takeh by 'the parties ccm be pattties to ddduce the eyidsnce which jurisipiction. As the disputed facts are canriot be resolved in the writ petjtion is not mairrtainQbje Howevei', jl remedy whichever avdilable te her i.tfte petitjon stdndsciismissed. 216/20Q5 ond I.A. No.676/Z005 Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge ^ Gi,PRJ—PS/3.5.0—12/2000—50.000. l' ^:: ^ IIIIUil-N