Dismissed

Badri Narain Pandey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC10 Jul 2023WRIC/21581/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the notification determining electoral constituencies for Sugarcane Cooperative Development Societies. The court found no merit in the petitioner's objection based on proximity and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed with the finding that there was no merit in the objection raised by the petitioner.

Badri Narain Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:135155-DB

¶2

Court No. - 21

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21581 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Badri Narain Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hemant Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,Narendra Kumar Giri

¶5

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.

¶6

1. The instant petition has been filed challenging the notification dated 30.3.2023, determining the constituencies for holding election of eight Sugarcane Cooperative Development Societies of District Deoria. The petitioner has also challenged a report dated 6.6.2023 submitted by the District Assistant Registrar to ADM (Finance & Revenue), Deoria in respect of the objection of the petitioner justifying inclusion of his village Basantpur in Barari constituency.

¶7

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that Barari is far away from the petitioner's village, whereas Araipar constituency area is much closer.

¶8

3. The report submitted by the District Assistant Cooperative Election Officer dated 6.6.2023 mentions that in the elections held in 2015, village Basantpur was part of Patalpur Election Constituency. The reason being that village Basantpur is situated between revenue village Barari and Barnai. Barnai is already included in election constituency Barari since before.

¶9

4. The instructions to the aforesaid effect have also been furnished by respondent no. 3 to learned Chief Standing Counsel and which has been placed before us for perusal. The map and the report annexed along with the instructions also evidences that village Basantpur is situated between village Barari and Barnai. The petitioner has also annexed a map which

¶10

also evidences the same. Concededly, 'revenue area' is one of the criteria for determining of Constituency under Rule 27. We therefore, find no merit in the objection raised by the petitioner.

¶11

5. The petition lacks merit and is dismissed.

¶12

(Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 10.7.2023 Jaideep/-

¶13

Digitally signed by :- JAIDEEP BANERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Badri Narain Pandey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badri Narain Pandey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishnu Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shriniwas Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikram Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and 2 Others

District Civil Court Bar Association and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rathore Security Service Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Gaytri Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others