RAM SWAROOP SACHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner along with four other persons were candidates for election to the office of Pradhan of village Girsi, Block Patara, Tahsil Ghatampur, district Kanpur Dehat. Two of the five candidates withdrew their candidature and the nominations of the other two candidates were found to be illegal by the Returning Officer, with the result, the Petitioner was the only candidate left in the field with a valid nomination and was accordingly declared elected Pradhan unopposed on 1.4.1995. A copy of the declaration in prescribed form has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

(2.) It appears that some complaints were made to the District Magistrate who called a report from the Returning Officer who submitted the report dated 1.5.1995 Informing the District Magistrate that the Petitioner had been duly elected as unopposed Pradhan. in the meantime, the District Magistrate sought the opinion from the Election Commissioner of the State and at his Instance, he cancelled the election of the Petitioner and directed for repoll on 23.4.1995. After the cancellation of his election, the Petitioner filed this writ petition in this Court in which on 21.4.1995 this Court directed the Petitioner to produce the wireless message referred to in the order dated 17.4.1995 whereby repoll has been ordered. The Petitioner has accordingly filed a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith the relevant documents. During the pendency of the writ petition report was held on 23.4.1995 in which the Respondent No. 5 was declared elected. Thereafter, the Respondent No. 5 was added as a party to this writ petition.

(3.) The Respondent No. 5 has filed a counter-affidavit. The Petitioner filed a rejoinder-affidavit in reply thereto. But the State has not filed any counter-affidavit inspite of time having been granted to it. Initially, we dismissed the writ petition by an order dictated in the court, but we did not sign that order, because in our opinion, the case required further hearing. Accordingly, the petition was directed to be listed for further hearing. Learned Counsel for the parties were heard again.