The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking to set aside a prior order cancelling the petitioner's election as Mukhia. The court held the petition was infructuous because elections had already been held in 2018.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4810 of 2014
Seema Bodra … … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and Others … … Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
For the Petitioner : None For the Resp.-State : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sahu, G.P. III Mr. Nalini Jha, A.C. to G.P. III -------
05/06.08.2019 Defect(s) as pointed out by the office is ignored.
None appears on behalf of the petitioner. However, Mr. Vinod Kumar Sahu, learned G.P. III for the respondent-State is present.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State that this writ application has become infructuous since elections have subsequently been held in the year 2018.
The petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order dated 24.07.2014 passed in Election Appeal No. 1/2010 by which the election of the petitioner to the post of Mukhia has been cancelled.
However, as has been stated above, since subsequent elections have been already held in the year 2018, this writ application stands dismissed as being infructuous.
(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Alok/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the cancellation of election remains maintainable after subsequent elections were held.
Seema Bodra
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
