Disposed¶29

Sonu Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Aug 2024CWJC/1704/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Zila Parishad Part 12 Chakki Buxar membership challenged; disqualification of member who was Government Contractor at nomination; section 136 Bihar Panchayat Raj Act 2006; runner-up candidate claiming success on rejection of nomination; Saroj Devi v. Sonu Kumar Singh; writ petition disposed of with liberty to approach appropriate authority; Patna High Court, Justice Rajiv Roy, 13-08-2024.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for the redressal of his grievance; no substantive relief adjudicated. ¶29

Sonu Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1704 of 2024

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Sonu Kumar Singh Son of Ramyan Singh, Resident of Purab Tola, Arak, Ward no.- 7, near Post Office, P.S.- Krishnabrahm, District- Buxar.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Director, Panchayati Raj Directorate, Bihar, Patna.

¶9

¶10

¶11

The District Magistrate, Buxar.

¶12

The District Panchayat Election Officer, Zila Parishad, Buxar.

¶13

The State Election Commission, through its Secretary, Mangles Road, Patna.

¶14

The Chief Election Commissioner, State Election Commission, Mangels Road, Patna.

¶15

Saroj Devi, W/o Parmanand Yadav, Resident of Village and P.O.- Chakki, P.S.- Brahampur, District- Buxar.

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, GP 14 For the SEC : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate ======================================================

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶19

3 13-08-2024

¶20

Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the

¶21

petitioner and Mr. Ravi Ranjan, representing the State Election Commission, Bihar, Patna and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar appearing for the State.

¶22

The present writ petition has been been preferred for the grant of following reliefs:-

¶23

“(i) For issuance of direction/writ/order to the Respondents to hold and declare the membership of respondent no.8 of Zila Parishad, Part 12, Buxar as null and void on the ground that she

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.1704 of 2024(3) dt.13-08-2024

¶25

2/2

¶26

was a Government Contractor, on the date when she filed her nomination, she was in position to earn profit from government department and this disqualifies her from becoming a member of Zila Parishad, under 136 of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act 2006.

¶27

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/ direction to the respondents to declare the petitioner as successful candidate who was second in number in counting of votes for Zila Parishad Part 12, Chakki, Buxar, on the ground that had nomination of return candidate namely Saroj Devi been rejected, the petitioner would have been successful.”

¶28

After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will approach the appropriate authority for the redressal of his grievance.

¶29

Granting such liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶30

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶31

vinayak/-

¶32

Sonu Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suraj Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Mithilesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Siddhnath Das @ Sidhnath Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sudhir Kumar Ojha @ Sudhir Kumar Vs Bihar State Bar Council

Rahul Raj Vs The State of Bihar

Aafak Alam Vs The State of Bihar