RANCHODLAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this petition, in the nature of "Public Interest Litigation", the petitioner is seeking directions to the respondents to cut-short the Schedule of the Panchayat Elections in such a manner so that it can be completed within the shortest duration from the usual duration, which is being fixed. The petitioner is also seeking direction to the respondents to conduct the elections of Gram Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat and Jila Panchayat on different dates. It is also the prayer of the petitioner to direct the District Election Officers to comply with the directives of the State Election Officer with regard to the preparation of voter list on the basis of the list prepared for Vidhan Sabha. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner at length, we find that before seeking the writ of mandamus for the relief's claimed as above, a detailed, specific and clear representation has not been submitted by the petitioner to the authority competent to decide the same and he has directly approached the Court. Copies of few representations filed with the petition reflects that they are not made to the authorities, who are competent to take decision, but are addressed directly to the Chief Minister and other Ministers. When, according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the Competent Authority to take decision is the Director/Deputy Director, Panchayat, it was necessary for the petitioner to have submitted the demand to the said authority. As the petitioner has directly filed the petition without approaching the Competent Authority of the respondents for the relief's claimed by making a clear, plain and unambiguous demand, we are not inclined to interfere into the matter as this stage. Our view finds support from the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation v. Subhash Sindhi Co-operative Housing Society, Jaipur, 2013 3 MPLJ 591.

(2.) In the circumstances, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed.