\^ 1"-' ^ -..-1 IN THE CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT OF .TUDICATURE AT BILASPUR C.G. W.P.No.^l;B]...../2005 WntPetition underArticles 226 & 227 ofthe Constitution oflndia. Petitioner Ramesher Sahu s/o Khamhan aged about 39 yrs. R/o vill. Rani Jaraud Tahsil Simga,Distt. RaipurC.G. Respondents .... tfC5ffD'°^ ^;^: ^5???-%^-^ ^^w w ^" 1. State of Chhatdsgarh through the secretary- Panchayat & rural development D.K.Bhavan, Raipur C.G. 2. Distt. Collector, Raipur, C.G. '3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat-Simga Distt. Raipur C.G. ^ 4. Narad sinh sahu s/o Bhagirathi aged. about 35 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 5. Hiralal vishwakarma s/o Bodhi ram aged. about 60 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. - 6. Shankerlal sahu s/o Mahettarlal aged. about 35 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. / 7. Bhagwati Prasad Sahu s/o Topi ram, aged. about 36 yrs. /'• -2- ^) -2- R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 8. Chatursing sahu s/o Sukhiram aged. about 40 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 9. Hiralal sahu s/o Topi ram aged. about 34 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G, lO.Lakhanlal baghmar s/o Dek ram, aged. about 65 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. ll.Anand ram sahu s/o Mant ram aged. about 26 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt.Raipur C.G. , 12.Nohar sahu s/o Maya ram aged. about 45 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. , 13.Tuka ram sahu s/o Poona ram aged. about 34 yrs. R/0 vill. Rani Jaraud, Tah. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 14.Nirwaachan adhikari/Tahsildar Gram Panchayat Nirwaachan 2005, Tahsil/block Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 15-Peethasin Adhikari polling booth No. 167 Gram Panchayat Nirwaachan 2005, block/Tah. Simga, (GramPanchayat Rani Jaraud) Distt. Raipur C.G. through Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. ^ -3- (5. -3-\ 16-Peethasin Adhikari polling booth No. 168 Gram Panchayat Nirwaachan 2005, block/Tah. Simga, (GramPanchayat Rani Jaraud) Distt. Raipur C.G. through Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 17-Peethasin Adhikari polling booth No. 169 Gram Panchayat Nirwaachan 2005, block/Tah. Simga, (GramPanchayat Rani Jaraud) Distt. Raipur C.G. through Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 18-Peethasin Adhikari polling booth No. 170 Gram Panchayat Nirwaachan 2005, block/Tah. Simga, (GramPanchayat Rani Jaraud) Distt. Raipur C.G. through Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G. 1. Perticulars of the Petitioner :- XI-HC-78 ^ffI^T^mq? vd-cflq'-qi^lrtq, U>-al^<l<?, [cic^l^-l^ ..t^.p..(Y?.'...^(.?.l.(?^,, OT^^TcpTf^rtq? n^Ton^^T^w^ y 3TT^?T 'q^P (tj|c|ij4<£;) W-^200^ ^PIT^ ^rftcT 3TT^$T Sio.gh T{iakiir, 07.11.2005 Shri B,L. E^eembra, Ach Shri Yashwaiit Sio.gh T{ By th.is writ petition Constitution of ludia fhe p| propnenr aiicl coiTecmess otj the Specitied Ofticer, Bbaf Petition No.Al/B/151 Yeai- Officer has dismissed t3ie e^ hcrcia uudcr Sectioii 122 of| re.ad wltli Rrnes, 2004 for rect rec^mitm^ Brief facts leadmg t.o petitioner herein aiid 10 otl^ the post of SEu-panch of Grajjn votes took place ou 15»1< respondeut No.4 nerem nan^e Sarpanch by a m^rgm of result the petitK>ner h.erei4 Section 122 of tlie Adhmivtu re^poudeuts hereia ami re^l respondents. Leai'o.ed Spec4i€ adducisig evidence to botli evidence disiiiissed ftie el4< laeiitioned above. —- <PI<4fcO<TtT1*1!^olT ^* F$^3[ ^Rl^-dK ^3l1^T3TI^9T |rocate ibr die peduoiier, tiakiir, Govt. Advocate fbr the State, under .^rticles 226 & 227 of tlie ^titioucr has questiDiied the lcgallty', me order dated 5.9.2005 passed by fapara, District Rmpur m Electiou E004-2005 whereby lesined Specilied Aion petitioxi filed by tlie petitiouer JC.G. Paiichayat Raj Adhinry-am, 199-3 ^mitmg ofvotes. plmg of this writ petitio-n are tha.t tlie [er persons conte^ted the election for ^L Paiichayat. Rani Jarod. Couiitiag of 2005 and at the eud of countiag let^ Narad Smgh was declared elected votes. Bemg dissatistled with ihe nxoved aii election petitNii under L 1993, notices were given to fhe ly of tlie samc wa^ also flled by thc led Ofilcer aiter givmg oppoiTiiiiity ibr the parties aod after recordmg the ction petition of tlie petitioner, as thli'ee LVEUH (^. XI-HC-78 ^vSf '-^i-yiri^, u>-^<<i*i<B, fqoiti^ H|*I<O| a?»iT^» 3IT^9T <3RW (llc|i^<ri) W^200 W^<T^TRrti4» ?W3iT^^Tw*fli<D 4t- ^RTTWrKifta 3n^^T -^ coiuisei impu^ued 1 have heard leanied Lesnied counsel for the] leamed Specifie.cl OfiEicer is pe^ m based on fhe oveirukd jud^ tfae matter of Smt. Ramrati V^. AIR 1997 BC 3072. He tm-tli^ did not except the app!ication| recouiixnig of votes, therefore, set aside, HavioLg iieai'd leaiiied perased the petitiou aad impu^i Penisai of kiipugned on( by leamed counsel for fhe pet| bcen. disniisscd afer : rclyiiig mcon'ect. Leamed Specified Of| wimesses of fhe petitioner 4 respondeiit No4 hereui rea( penuitmiate paragraph of the iii tlicir cro-ss-cxaoLiinatioii 'd'iat:. maiiner, there was no irregut agents of the petitioiier liCT€i4 place and none of fhe agents oij writing for recozint of votes or$| avcniicute, uext day 'die peti:tio| was noi. accepted. Tliereibre, ^ <bWfc641^ HINc6T^?1^^ ^RJIN^IK ^sri^ran^T isel fbr tlie petitioner on admission, petitiotier argued that the order of yersc, for tlie rcason that the Baine ixient of the Kon'ble Apcx Court ia. Saroj Devi aind others reported m T argued that the Presiding Otficer nioved by the petitioner hereiii for tlic order inipugned is Mabie to be ko'iiusei for "tlie' peutk>iier, I: havc onier, [er shcws that o:rg7irD.en.t adva.nced. tioner that the election Dctition has upon &.C overrulcd judgiiicut is icer after evaluatmg tiie .evidence of .ereto. and also fhe wimesses of ^hed to the coD^hision in the ^rder that witnesscs have aciiiiitted L couiitiag took place isi a peace.fiil aiiw, at tiie end of countmg tiie alter takmg coiintmg sUp lett flie petitioner nioved any appUcation in the grozincl of irregularity. As per icr Ined to give appUcation but tliat he Speciiled Ofiicer- has dismissed ^•'v XI-HC-78 ^xyq '-qiqirt^, U>-al\-l<l<<,fslril<(4y'< *i 1*101 a»^T^» 3?l^^T^{^Tfc^ ?P?T3n^$T^^icb .' &"<. 3?T^5T q^^ (»jc|ij6|<g) ^200 ^RTTW ^rf^T 3H^^T thtit the petitiou ou fhe ground tii^t able to esmbH.sh t'ciat 011 rcspondcut No.4 was cieclar| iixipugned order ^how^ tliat Electiou Officers iii wliicli ailegatiou of iiTeguicUity m| petitioneras votes were rejectec| I have also perused th^ refen'cd by tlic Spccificd OiS|c evidence of Lalehaii Lal aiid tliey were not present at tlj|€ evidenee is of ao reievance. ageiit naraely Johrilal is con^ has steted that.hc was pr^sc|iit took place iii a peacefu! mai3|ner were present, He has simpij rejected, were not shown to t4< stated that io. respect of that) furllicr stated tliat aficr couiil tbr his iiouse aad he had nt Similar was tiie evideuce of exteut saying th.at the couiit^o.i and he does not knovv th.at E favour* He furthcr statcd that votes, wtiereas, resp^ cpa^fo^i)^ ^TR^f^'fe^ ^RI^-CK ^3Tf^T3II^?T the petitiouer lierem has not been 4-ccount of hTegixIarity in countmg ^d elected. Further periisal of the |a re'au:TjL was filed on behalf of tlie |tiiey have categoric^illy deuied tlie couutmg of votes aud tiiat tiie illegally, ifc evidence of witaesses of pctltiouer ^cer ia 'the judginciit , As far as the. |tlie petiooner himself is concesiied/ tiaie ot counting, tiieretore, tneu' |As fer as the evidence of petitioners bcmed, iii the cross-exp.iiiiQ.ation he ^it fcill the end of couB.tiiig, couiitiiig aiid agents of ali die caiididates stated tliat tlie votes, wliicii were [e sgents but at the samje time he has no writteu coraplaio.t was iD-ade. He fing he took the couB.tmg slip and lcft {jt made an.y request for recountiag, Souchaud aiid he has goue to ttie took place in. a peaceful majiner \0 rejected votes were cast ia whose 'the pctifcioiicr hcrciii Iiad sccurcd 77 )udent . No,4 secured 58 ,r ^ Xt-HC-78 vjx,i| -r<41^4 Irt^l, u-^it^Ko, Rrtiiiyx *IIH<AI a>»H^" W^200 3IT^?T 1T^P (yit'36i<s) 31T^?T^rR1rii<b ^8IT3IT^^T?CTFF '^'^ ». r'r 'Roshan/- ^ SP" ^ ^ g^TTWr ^iRa 3TT^?T -^- votes, tlierefore, his evidenc^ situation. He has furtber gon^ place in whk^h 02 votes of res^ furtlier stated tliat 110. writfat recount of votes was made to finding of the Specmed Officer| irregiii^rity, The unpiigned o^ appreciation of evidenoe on re^ ablc to niakc out a casc fbr iiiN in tlie resuit, me petitit dismissed and it is, accordmgl itself. Consequently. M.tW.jP. A| In view of this order, staiids disposed OL (hN(c541^ Hl^lttTt'f^1^ <<RI^S<I'< ^^^ran^OT is totaliv couu-ajY to tb.e factual to the extent that eveii necount took Dndent No.4 werc iiicreased, He bas :ii coiiiplaiixt or rcquest rcgardiiig iie Presiding Omcer, Tiierefore, uie does not suficr trom any iltegatrty or ^ler faas been passed correctty after ?ord an.cl the petitioner has not been ti-ifcreucc bv 'lliis Court. >n of the petitioiier is liable to be ^v, tlismissed at tlic admission stage 10,4195/05 aiso staiids dismissed, |A. No,9052/05 fbr urgeiit heariiig Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge