LAWS(PAT)-2004-4-63

ASHOK PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On April 28, 2004
Ashok Paswan Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.7.2001 passed by the Munsif, Saharsa in Election Petition No. 44 of 2001 whereby he had debarred the petitioner from filing the written statement. Further prayer made by the petitioner is to quash the order dated 5.9.2001 (Annexure -3) whereby his prayer for recall of the order dated 26.7.2001 has been rejected.

(2.) SHORT facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner as also respondent no.4 contested the election to the office of Mukhiya of Nauhatta (West) Gram Panchayat. In the said election, petitioner was elected. Respondent No.4 who lost the election, challenged the petitioner 'selection by filing a election petition which was registered as Election Petition No.44 of 2001. Petitioner appeared in the election petition and prayed for time to file the written statement which was granted. Thereafter, the petitioner made prayer for time to file the written statement on 2.7.2001 which was also acceded to. Thereafter the election petition was taken up on 17.7.2001 and on that date also, petitioner filed application for time to file written statement and the learned Munsif acceded to his prayer making it clear that the opportunity to file the written statement has been given as the last chance. Petitioner did not avail that opportunity and when the matter was taken up on 26.7.2001, he again filed application for time to file the written statement which was turned down and the petitioner was debarred from filing the written statement. Thereafter, the petitioner filed application for recall of the said order and by the impugned order dated 5.9.2001, said prayer has ben rejected and while doing so, the learned Munsif observed that a trend has developed among the litigants not to avail the opportunity given to them to file written statement and to wake up only when the adverse order is passed. This practice deserves to be curbed.

(3.) JC to G.P. VII appears on behalf of the State whereas the State Election Commission is represented by Mr. K.B. Nath.