PREMTA BAIGA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is raising grievance with regard to irregularities committed during course of counting of votes casted for the post of Member of Zila Panchayat Shahdol.

(2.) The counsel for the petitioner submits that pointing out such irregularities, the petitioner made an application (Annexure-P/2) to the authority, but the same has not been decided so far. Therefore, he prays that the respondents/authority may be directed to decide the petitioner's pending application.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Government Advocate and learned counsel for the respondent/Election Commission have opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner saying that the result of the election has already been declared, therefore, at the most the petitioner can raise her grievance by filing an election petition.