IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13296 of 2007 MIRA SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS With CWJC No.7176 of 2008 MIRA SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ------ In C.W.J.C. No.13296/2007 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ras Bihari Thakur For Respondent No.5: Mr.Bajrangi Lal For the Election Commssion: Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh For the State: Mr. A. Amamullah, S.C.17. In C.W.J.C. No.7176/2008 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ras Bihari Thakur For Respondent No.5: Mr. Bajrangi Lal For the Election Commission: Mr. Sanmjeev Nikesh For the State: Mr. Md. Razal Rahman, G.P. 6 --- 3. 17.9.2008 Both the writ applications have been filed by the same petitioner, who is the elected candidate on the post of Mukhiya, against the order passed in Election Petition No. 01/2008 pending before the 2nd Munsif, Ara. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsels for the Election Commission, the State and Respondent No.5, the election petitioner. In C.W.J.C. No.13296 of 2007, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 6.9.2007 passed in Misc. Case No. 185/2007 ( Annexure-1) by the District Judge, by which he has directed the Election Tribunal to dispose of the election petition preferably by recourse to day- to-day proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned District Judge has no jurisdiction to entertain any 2 miscellaneous case in an election case since the Munsif in such matter functions as an Election Tribunal under the provisions of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act and no role has been assigned to the District Judge in the matter to act as the revisional or appellate authority or to entertain any petition on such a miscellaneous petition under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Learned counsel for Respondent No.5, concedes that she had chosen a wrong forum in the matter, but otherwise seeks to justify the directions given in the order in view of the fact that according to him the petitioner, who is the elected candidate on the post of Mukhia, is making every effort to delay the disposal of the election petition. It is stated that repeatedly the petitioner has approached this Court by filing earlier writ petition being C.W.J.C. No.14911/ 2006 which was dismissed by order dated 30.05.2006 and C.W.J.C. No.15084/2007 which was also disposed of by order dated 20.2.2008. It is submitted that the present two writ petitions add up to 4 writ petitions filed by the petitioner in the course of two years. It is also pointed out by learned counsel for Respondent No.5 that the petitioner is also making attempt to delay the disposal of the election petition by not taking proper steps in the matter. It is stated that the evidence of Respondent No.5 was closed on 18.3.2008, but despite the passage of six months, the petitioner has not produced his witnesses. C.W.J.C. No.7176 2008 has been filed by the 3 petitioner for quashing the order dated 13.3.2008 passed in the Election Petition No.01/2006 by the 2nd Munsif, Ara, by which he has directed to file the documents before the Tribunal to be exhibited and marked in election case. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the documents in question not being public documents, the certified copies thereof are not allowed to be supplied to any one and thus the order of the Election Tribunal is contrary to law. On a consideration of the entire matter, this Court is in agreement with learned counsel for the petitioner that the District Judge has no role to play in the matter of election petition and thus, he should not have entertained any application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. C.W.J.C. No.13296 of 2007 is, accordingly, allowed and the order dated 6.9.2007 passed by the District Judge, Ara is set aside. So far as C.W.J.C. No. 7176/2008 is concerned, it is an order passed in the course of trial of the election petition and learned counsel was unable to point out any perversity or glaring illegality on the face of the order so as to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court. C.W.J.C. No.7176/2008 is, accordingly, dismissed. From the conspectus of facts stated by learned counsel for Respondent No.5, it is evident that the petitioner, who is the successful candidate in the election to the post of Mukhia, is leaving no stone unturned in order to delay the disposal of the 4 election petition. Learned Munsif is directed to take note of the said fact and not treat the mere filing of any writ petition by the petitioner as operating as any stay of the proceeding before him and, accordingly, proceed in the matter on a day to day basis so as to conclude the trial of the election petition as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from today. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.)