Court No. - 13
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3151 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mahendra Prasd Gaur
Respondent :- Ramita Devi And 14 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Amresh Tripathi,Pankaj Kumar Gupta
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Shri.Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner who is the election petitioner in Election Petition No.7/2017, (Mahendra Prasad Gaur & Ors Vs. Ramita Devi & Ors), which is pending before the District Judge, Kushi Nagar, wherein the election of the respondents/defendants is in question. The defendant no.1 was elected as Chairman of Nagar Panchayat, Ramkola. The petitioner/plaintiff has lost the election. The election petition has been filed on various grounds. He further submits that the learned court below has framed issues on 16.4.2018 and thereafter this election petition has been adjourned on the one pretext or the other. He has also relied on a judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ- C No.67587 of 2015, Manni Lal Vs. State of U.P., & Ors, wherein it has been held that:
"The Supreme Court in Satya Narain vs. Dhuja Ram and Ors. (1974) 4 SCC 237 emphasised that for proper functioning of a democracy, the principal object of the Act is to ensure purity of elections and, therefore, when an election of a returned candidate is challenged, trial has to be necessarily expedited. Though these observations were expressed in relation to the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the same would equally apply to the election of a member of the Zila Panchayat. In P. Nalla Thampy Thera Vs. B. Shanker, (1984) Supp.Scc 631, and F.A. Sapa Vs. Singora,(1991) 3 SCC 375, the Supreme Court expressed the same view.
Recently, in Mohd. Akbar Vs. Ashok Sahu & Ors.,JT 2015 (3) SC 311 and Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh Vs. Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prtihibiraj Singh, JT 2015 (9) SC 113, the Supreme Court also held that election petitions should be disposed of expeditiously.
The observations made by the Supreme Court in Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh are as follows:
"A voter casts his vote as a responsible citizen to choose the masters for governing the country. That being the trust of the electorate in an elected candidate, when he faces an assail to his election, it should be his sanguine effort to become free from the assail in the election petition and work with attainment and not take shelter seeking adjournments with the elated hope that he can be triumphant in the contest by passage of time. This kind of attitude has to be curbed from all angles because law does not countenance it "
The principle which has been applied by the Supreme Court in dealing with election petitions filed under the Representation of the People Act should also be applied to election petitions filed under the provisions of the Act.
We, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, consider it appropriate to issue a direction that the election petition filed by the petitioner should be decided expeditiously."
On the basis of the above-mentioned legal position, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this case is also squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment in the case of Manni Lal (supra).
Considering the submission, perused the record, I am of the view this this case is also squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment in the case of Manni Lal (supra).
Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned court below to decide the Election Petition No.7/2017, (Mahendra Prasad Gaur & Ors Vs. Ramita Devi & Ors), which is pending before the District Judge, Kushi Nagar, after hearing the parties concerned on priority basis without granting any unnecessary adjournment within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of the order is submitted by the petitioner before the court below.
Order Date:-26.4.2019-SB