PREM NATH MISHRA Vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aspect that the learned Judge declined to interfere in a bunch of writ petitions which were pending consideration before him is not a matter which is connected with the case of the petitioner.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner Mr. Amar Prakash did not appear. Instead, submissions were made by a lawyer holding his brief, Mr. Jyoti Shankar Mishra Advocate, and he was heard.

(3.) IN so far as the petitioner 'scase is concerned, he was in no uncertain terms and beyond reasonable doubt conscious and aware that there is an impediment that if he was holding a post or an assignment connected with the Government, he is in a position of disability. This aspect is on record. The nomination papers were to be filed on or before 8 March, 2002. The petitioner filed his nomination paper before this date for Ward No. 8. His nomination paper was rejected. This was on 11 March, 2002. The petitioner was trying to impress upon the Returning Officer that he had tendered his resignation on that day. The Returning Officer has recorded "Inke Dwara Sanwiksha ke din (11.3.2002) ko. lok abhiyojak pad se tyagpatra sambandhi awedap ki chaya prati di gai hai".