(C. M. Application No. 151143 of 2019) This is an application for clarification/modification of the order dated 10.12.2019 supported with an affidavit.
Heard Shri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Sudeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant/opposite party no. 4.
Sri Sudeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant seeking clarification of the aforesaid order submits that incorrect statement was made before the Court by the counsel for the petitioner to the effect that the pleadings have been exchanged and issues have been framed and evidence has also been led in the matter whereas the fact is that the applicant being elected Gram Pradhan had filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 which was rejected and the proceedings reached this Court which were decided as recently as on 22.10.2019. He says that the applicant has not yet filed written statement nor has led evidence. Though he says that issues have been framed by proceeding ex-parte which was recalled by the District Judge subsequently. He says that the written statement could not be filed on account of pendency of proceedings under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C.
On being confronted, Sri Tiwari admitted to the fact that the applicant who is the defendant in the election petition has not filed written statement and has not led evidence, though, he says that this is nothing but a dilatory tactic on his part.
Be that as it may, the facts should have been stated correctly before this Court.
In view of the above, the order dated 10.12.2019 is modified to the extent that the applicant-Ms. Usha Katiyar shall file her written statement in the proceedings before the District Judge within a period of 10 days from today, as, consented by Sri Sudeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. Thereafter, the District Judge who is the Prescribed Authority under the relevant statute shall revisit the issues already framed and ascertain as to whether in view of the pleadings in the written statement any fresh issues are required to be framed. If he finds that it is so required then he shall do the same within next three days. Thereafter, evidence shall be led on the said issues by all the concerned parties. The applicant- Ms. Katiyar shall be allowed to lead evidence in respect of other issues also as she has not done the same as yet. This exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the framing of the issues. The matter shall thereafter be heard on day-to-day basis without any adjournment to any of the parties, except in exceptional circumstances.
If the counsels are not available the party shall make alternative arrangement. The hearing shall be concluded within two weeks from its start. Thereafter, the judgement shall be pronounced within the next three weeks. This schedule shall be adhered strictly by the parties and the Revisional Authority.
In the event, the applicant- Ms. Katiyar does not co-operate as aforesaid the District Judge shall proceed ex-parte and conclude the proceedings within the aforesaid time.
With this clarification, the application is disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be provided to the learned counsel for the parties within 24 hours on payment of usual charges.
Order Date :- 20.12.2019 shravan