HARI SHANKAR JAIN ADVOCATE Vs. CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two writ petitions which challenge the procedure adopted by the Election Commission of India and the Chief Electoral Officer (Graduates Constituency) U. P. Lucknow in preparing the Electoral Roll for the aforesaid election of the Council which are likely to be held some times in this year. One petition is filed by Sri Hari Shankar Jain, a practising advocate of this Court namely writ petition No. 999 of 2008 (M. B.) and he has argued the matter in person. The other writ petition has been filed by Sri Sudarsha Avasthi and that petition has also been argued by Sri Hari Shankar Jain.

(2.) A short counter affidavit has been filed by the District Magistrate/assistant Electoral Registration Officer, Lucknow in the writ petition filed by Sri Sudarsha Avasthi to which rejoinder affidavit has also been filed. Since the questions involved in both the writ petitions are common, therefore the parties have given out that the affidavits exchanged in the writ petition of Sudarsha Avasthi, may be taken into consideration even in the writ petition filed by Sri Hari Shankar Jain.

(3.) FURTHER argument is that the application forms No. 18 and 19 as the case may be were not collected/received in the office of Electoral Registration Officer or Assistant Electoral Registration Officer but. they were received in the office of the designated officers which was not permissible under the Rules and lastly it has been argued that the forms were accepted in bulk, whereas the form was to be submitted individually and that the application forms in some cases did contain either at the top or at the bottom the names of the persons who are prospective candies for contesting election which disentitles them from getting enrolled as electors.