Court No. - 6
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1966 of 2018 Petitioner :- Jayarani Mishra And Anr Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 17 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Narayan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J.
Heard Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1,2,4,5 and 6.
Notice is not being issued to the respondent no.3 at this stage since there are no persona allegations against him in the writ petition.
The petitioner in the writ petition is seeking quashing of the order dated 16.2.2018 whereby the order of the prescribed authority in the election petition has been set aside and the matter has been remanded to the prescribed authority to re-hear the matter with regard to the application dated 11.4.2016.
The petitioner no.1 is the election petitioner and in the petition an application was filed on 11.4.2016 under Order 1 Rule 10 read with 151 CPC for impleading certain persons in the array of respondents. That application was allowed by the prescribed authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kaushambi by order dated 22.7.2017 and it is against this order the respondent no.7 filed a revision before the Additional District Judge, Kaushambi.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order dated 22.7.2017 was an interlocutory order against which no revision was maintainable in view of the law laid down by this court in the case of Rahmat Khan vs District Judge, Bareilly and others, 2001 (92) R.D. 549 and in Mohd. Mustafa vs U.P. Ziladhikari, Phoolpur, Azamgarh and others, 2007 (7) ADJ 1 (DB). He further submits that this objection regarding maintainability was taken by the petitioner in her objections in paragraph 5 of her objections but it was never discussed by the court below while passing the impugned order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the prescribed authority to dispose of the election petition itself.
In this view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.2-Sub Divisional Officer/Prescribed Authority Manjhanpur Kaushambi to decide the pending election petition in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order in his office.
It is made clear that no unnecessary adjournment shall be granted to either of the parties.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Kirti