AJAY KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the election of respondent no. 6 as Pramukh of Rupauli Panchayat Samiti in the district of Purnea. He has not filed any election petition in terms of Section 137 nor he has moved before the State Election Commission nor has he filed any such application before the District Magistrate -cum -Collector, Purnea in terms of rules and procedures laid down by the State Election Commission.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner relies on a judgment of this Court in the case of Vijay Kapari V/s. The State of Bihar & Ors. since reported in 2009(3) BBCJ 584 wherein in paragraph -19, it has been held that no election petition would lie because no rules have been provided, as contemplated under Section 40(4) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and, election petition in terms of Section 137 of the Act would not lie. The writ petition was only the remedy.

(3.) AFTER the Vijay Kapari&aposs case (supra) the State Election Commission on 3rd June, 2009 framed set of procedures for election and resolution of such disputes in respect of such elected officebearers. These procedural rules have been made with reference to Section 40(4) and Section 67(4) of the Act, which reads as follows: '' 40. Election of Pramukh and Up -Pramukh. ''......... (4) The election of Pramukh and Up -Pramukh, filling up of vacancies in the said offices and determination of disputes relating to such election shall be in accordance with such rules or procedure as may be prescribed by the State Election Commission. 67. Election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha. ''...... (4) The election of the Adhyaksha or the Upadhyaksha of Zila Parishad and filling up of vacancies in the said offices and determination of disputes relating to such election shall be in accordance with such rules or procedures as may be prescribed by the State Election Commission.