Partly allowed

Ajijun Nesha v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC28 Mar 2011CWJC/4997/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking voter enrollment, the Court dismissed the application noting lack of jurisdiction post-electoral roll finality. Instead, it directed the District Magistrate to hold an enquiry into alleged dereliction of duty by election officials.

What did the court decide?

District Magistrate to hold enquiry into alleged dereliction of duty by officials and report within four months.

Ajijun Nesha Vs the State of Bihar and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2011)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
 CWJC No.4997 of 2011
 AJIJUN NESHA .
 Versus
 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS .
 -----------

¶2

28.03.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.

¶3

The petitioner seeks inclusion of her name in the voters list of Village Sundarpur under Gram Panchayat Raj Pachrukha (East) P.S. & Anchal Banjaria, District East Champaran so as to enable her not only to caste her vote in the ensuing Panchayat election but also file nominations for the post of Mukhiya.

¶4

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that when her name was left out from the voters list she petitioned the Booth Level Officer who on 25.2.2010 submitted a list of persons whose names had been left out in which her name figured at serial 16.This was given to the BDO cum Assistant Election Registration Officer on 20.7.2010. A fresh list was submitted by the Block Level Officer on 3.1.2011 to the BDO cum Assistant Election Registration officer in which her name again figured at serial 40. The petitioner states that she was asked by the BDO cum Assistant Election Registration Officer to appear before him on 4.3.2010 which she did notwithstanding all of which her name was not added.

¶5

The lack of jurisdiction in the Court to grant any relief to the petitioner after the Panchayat elections have been notified and the electoral role have achieved finality have been noticed in the order of this Court in CWJC No. 4723 of 2011 disposed off by this Court on 25.3.2011 in light of the order of a Division Bench of this Court reported in 2001 (3) PLJR 677.

¶6

That however shall not close the issue with regard to the allegations of dereliction in duty by those responsible for necessary corrective action by the officials, if what the petitioner contends on facts be correct.

¶7

The District Magistrate, East Champaran is directed to hold an enquiry by himself after notice to the petitioner and the BLO/BDO. He shall call for the original orders of the matter and then arrive at a finding of fact. If he concludes that there was any dereliction duty on the part of the government officials concerned, it is expected that he shall consider ordering appropriate departmental action against the concerned so that in future the citizens are not denied right to franchise merely because of dereliction of duty by those in whom the Government vested powers in trust to be used and not abused.

¶8

Let such compliance by the District Magistrate be done by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and or presentation of a copy of this order before him.

¶9

The writ application stands dismissed with the aforesaid directions.

¶10

Snkumar/-

¶11

(Navin Sinha,J.)

Ajijun Nesha v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajijun Nesha v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nibha Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Md.Nizam Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Taramuni Devi and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sita Ram Choudhary Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Palti Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sultan Yadav Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.