RAJ KUMARYADAV Vs. SAMIR KUMAR MAHASETH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR how this Election Petition has come up for hearing on limitation, a few facts first may be referred to.

(2.) THIS petition has been filed on behalf of Raj Kumar Yadav relating to election of one Samir Kumar Mahaseth as member of the Bihar Legislative Council from Local Bodies Constituency which election was held in the month of July, 2002 (sic '' 2003 ?).The admitted position is that the period of limitation of forty five days expired on 27.8.2003 on which date the designated judge was sitting in court till 4.15 P.M.The court hours having expired, the designated election Judge retired into the chambers where at 4.45 P.M. Sri P.K. Verma, the learned counsel for the petitioner came and wanted to file this election petition. Since under High Court Rules the election petition could be filed only in the open court, I, as the designated election judge refused to accept the petition beyond court hours. Learned counsel said that though petition was made ready that very day for presentation, because of some delay in finalising it, he had gone to the court after court hours but by that time the Judge had retired to his chambers. Learned counsel also requested in chambers that the Court officer might be directed to accept that by making an initial over the petition noting the time of presentation so that the petition might be presented on the next working day. Since High Court Rules did not permit that, I refused that prayer also.

(3.) BEFORE proceeding with the submissions of the learned counsel, Rules 6 and 7 of Chapter XXI -E (which contains the Rules for disposal of the election petition filed under section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), are reproduced below: ''