Court No. - 23
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4988 of 2018 Petitioner :- Chandrama Prasad Maurya Respondent :- Sub Divisional Magistrate And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Pande,Rohit Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anil Kumar Aditya,Manish Kumar Nigam,Rajesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Heard counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is the elected Gram Pradhan of the Village. Election Petition No.8 of 2015 (Computer No.T201614700110061) under Section 12-C of the U.P Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1947) was instituted by respondent no.2 challenging the election of the petitioner.
The aforesaid election petition was dismissed by the Prescribed Authority/District Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar District Varanasi vide his judgment and order dated 7.11.2017. Against the aforesaid order dated 7.11.2017, the respondent no.2 filed a Revision under Section 12-C (6) of the Act 1947 which was registered as Revision Petition No.133 of 2017. The aforesaid Revision Petition No.133 of 2017 was heard by the Additional District Judge, Court No.9, Tehsil Sadar District Varanasi and was allowed by his judgment and order dated 16.7.2018. By its aforesaid order, the Revisional Court has set aside the order dated 7.11.2017 passed by the Prescribed Authority and has remanded back the matter to the Prescribed Authority for recounting of the votes polled in the elections. The order dated 16.7.2018 passed by the Additional District Judge in Revision Petition No.133 of 2017 has been challenged in the present writ petition.
A perusal of the judgment and order dated 16.7.2018 passed by the Revisional Court shows that the Revisional Court has stated that the order dated 7.11.2017 passed by the Prescribed Authority was cryptic and the Prescribed Authority had not exercised its jurisdiction in accordance with law. However, a reading of the aforesaid judgment of the Revisional Court also shows that no reasons have been given in the same to direct a recounting of the votes polled. The counsel for respondent no.2 has fairly conceded that the order dated 16.7.2018 passed by the Revisional Court, so far as it directs a recounting of votes, is a non speaking order and is not supported by any reasons. It was also argued by the counsel for respondent no.2, that in the circumstances of the case, the Revisional Court itself had the power under Section 12-C(8) of the Act, 1947 to vary the order passed by the Prescribed Authority and in certain circumstances, the Revisional Court may not be required to remand back the matter to the Prescribed Authority and may pass appropriate orders itself. Without entering into the merits of the case, the order dated 16.7.2018 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.9, District Varanasi is set aside on the limited ground that it is a non speaking order and is not supported by any reasons. The matter is remanded back to the Revisional Court to pass fresh orders in Revision Petition No.133 of 2017 after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties.
It is clarified that the Revisional Court shall pass fresh orders independent of the findings recorded by it in its previous order dated 16.7.2018.
The parties shall appear before the Revisional Court on 7.9.2018 on which date the Revisional Court may fix any date for hearing of Revision Petition No.133 of 2017. No subsequent adjournment shall be granted to either of the parties and the Revisional Court shall decide Revision Petition No.133 of 2017 within a period of one month from the date fixed by it.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018 IB