Petitioner sought quashing of election nomination notices due to typographical errors and cooperative society information. Court dismissed the petition on grounds of delay and laches, noting the election process had commenced and voting was imminent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2649 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rajiv Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Satyam Singh
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard Mr. Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Satyam Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents-State.
The principal prayer made in the writ petition, reads thus:
"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the notice published in Daily News Paper on 30.12.2017 in the name of typographical error (Annexure 5) and notice dated 01.08.2018 in the name of cooperative information (Annexure 6))."
By notification dated 30.12.2017, constituencies have been determined for conducting election of the cooperative society. We are informed that a notification declaring the election has been issued on 6 November 2017 and the election process commenced on 27 December 2017. The notification further shows that the voting would be on 29 January 2018. In view thereof, this petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. Order accordingly.
Dismissal of the writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner from taking appropriate remedy, if any, after the election process is complete.
Order Date :- 19.1.2018 RK
(Suneet Kumar, J) (Dilip B Bhosale, CJ)
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
None citedReferred
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajiv Kumar
State Of U.P.
Respondent No. 2 to 4
Respondent No. 5
Dilip B Bhosale
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
