Pramod Kumar vs Election Commission U.P. Lko. Thru. Chief Election Commissioner and 5 Others

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for respondent no.1 and learned Standing counsel for respondent nos.2, 3 and 4. Issuance of notice to respondent nos.5 and 6 is dispensed with.

¶10

This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayer:-

¶11

" (i). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents forthwith to alter the duties of Booth election Officers-Sita Devi and Sarika Gautam appointed for village Alaulapur Shivpuri, Post Rajepur, Police Station Fatehpur-84, District Unnao, U.P."

¶12

It is the case of the petitioner that BLO namely Sita Devi and Sarika Gautam (respondent nos. 5 and 6) are local residents of village Alaulapur Shivpuri, Post Rajepur, Police Station Fatehpur-84, District Unnao and his apprehension that there could be bias in the election proceedings. In this regard, the petitioner has moved a representation to the competent authority and has submitted that the looking to the fact that the respondent nos.5 and 6 may affect/influence the election proceedings being local residents, therefore, the representation of the petitioner may be decided.

¶13

On the other hand, Shri Anurag Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.1 has placed a copy of instructions dated 18.09.2025 sent by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bangarmau, District Unnao wherein it has been stated that the employees who are local

¶14

WRIC No. 9258 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

residents have knowledge about the local geography and the environment therefore, they are liable to perform their duties properly. The employees who are posted in the local area are therefore, deployed to carry out the smooth functioning of the election proceedings. The Petitioner has made a complaint and no other person of the locality has made complaint against respondent nos. 5 and 6 and about 65% work regarding survey has been completed from 19.08.2025 to 29.09.2025 and it would be difficult to make posting of other employees at the place of respondent nos. 5 and 6 and the Election Commission will face hardship in completing the election process.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid factual aspect, we find that the election proceedings which is being undertaken by the answeringrespondents, there is no violation of statutory right of the petitioner. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly, dismissed.

¶18

September 23, 2025 Pks

¶19

(Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SETH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pramod Kumar v. Election Commission U.P. Lko. Thru. Chief Election Commissioner and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar v. Election Commission U.P. Lko. Thru. Chief Election Commissioner and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Virendra Bahadur Singh Thru. Sole Proprietor Virendra Bahadur Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and 2 Others

Shabina Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. and 2 Others

M/S Satgur Traders Thru. Its Proprietor Ramji Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax and 2 Others

Pramod Kumar Vs Election Commission U.P. Lko. Thru. Chief Election Commissioner and 5 Others

Pawan Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Transport Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Sachin Kumar Shahi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Transport Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others