Disposed

Bal Govind Modi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Jan 2021WPC/1514/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a writ petition challenging the preparation of the electoral roll and ward delimitation. Without entering into merits, the court directed the petitioner to seek relief from the State Election Commission.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner given liberty to prefer an application before the State Election Commission; respondent directed to take appropriate decision within reasonable period.

Bal Govind Modi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Election Law | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1514 of 2020

Bal Govind Modi

..... … Petitioner

Versus

State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Deputy Commissioner, Koderma.

¶7

The District Election Officer, Koderma.

¶8

The Executive Officer, Municipal Corporation, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma.

¶9

The Election Agent, Municipal Corporation, Jhumri Telaiya.

¶10

The Block Level Officer, Municipal Corporation, Jhumri Teliya.

¶11

Bigan Nayan, Block Level Officer, Municipal Corporation, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma.

¶12

Sandhya Barnwal, Block Level Officer, Municipal Corporation, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma.

¶13

The State Election Commission, Jharkhand through its Secretary, Nirwachan Bhawan, Ratu Road, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents

¶14

¶15

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶16

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. H.K. Shikarwar, Advocate For the Res. Nos.1-3 : Mr. Sreenu Garapati, S.C. III For the Res. Nos.4-6 : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Advocate. For the Res. No.9 : Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate --------

¶17

03/04.01.2021 The present writ petition is taken up today through Video conferencing.

¶18

At the request of Mr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the State Election Commission, Jharkhand through its Secretary, Nirwachan Bhawan, Ratu Road, Ranchi as respondent no.9 in the present writ petition.

¶19

Considering the present situation prevailing due to outbreak of Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the office is directed to make necessary insertion in the cause title of the writ petition.

¶20

Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate appears and waives notice on

¶21

behalf of the newly impleaded respondent no.9.

¶22

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent-authorities to publish the electoral roll of Jhumri Telaiya Municipal Council. The petitioner has also prayed for making proper survey and to make appropriate correction in the voter list particularly with regard to Ward No.23, as according to the petitioner, “Gas Godown Gali, Jhumri Telaiya” is being made part of Ward No.24 without taking any step for delimitation of the wards in the said municipal council.

¶23

- 2 -

¶24

Mr. Bharat Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.4 to 6 submits that since the dispute raised by the petitioner is with regard to preparation of the electoral roll and the State Election Commission, Jharkhand has been vested with the said power under Section 538 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011, the petitioner has the efficacious remedy of agitating the present dispute before the State Election Commission, Jharkhand.

¶25

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the dispute raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer an application on the present issue before the State Election Commission, Jharkhand. On receipt of the said application, the respondent no.9 shall take appropriate decision on the said application within a reasonable period.

¶26

The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶27

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶28

Rohit

Bal Govind Modi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bal Govind Modi v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Ms the Rameshwara Jute Mills Ltd. through Its Authorized Signatory K K Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Hiralal Agencies Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Santosh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Hiralal Agencies Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Santosh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Dashmi Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ms Maa Bhagwati Construction Represented through One of Its Partners Balraj Anand Vs the State of Jharkhand

Boulevard Enterprises through Its Partner Namely Sandeep Murarka Vs the State of Jharkhand