RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well as Mr. N. Sailo, learned Addl. Advocate General, Mizoram for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Also heard Mr. M. Guite, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 3, the State Election Commission, Mizoram. None appears for the private Respondents.

(2.) By this common judgment it is proposed to dispose of both the writ petitions as indicated above inasmuch as the facts involved in both the writ petitions are almost one and the same and the law involved thereto also is similar.

(3.) For better appreciation, it is proposed to place the facts of each of the writ petitions as under: