RAM PRAKASH MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner prays for a writ in the nature of mandamus to restrain the respondent authorities of the Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar in proceeding with the request made by the State Election Commission as contained in letter No.2416 dated 28.3.2016 whereby the election schedule for reconstitution of the Katihar Municipal Corporation and Purnea Patna High Court CWJC No.7492 of 2016 dt.17 -05 -2016 Municipal Corporation has been proposed. A copy of such communication is present at Annexure -6 to the writ petition. The petitioner also seeks a mandamus to the authorities of the Urban Development and Housing Department to first ascertain the population of the different caste including those who have been included in the list of Scheduled Tribe vide notification dated 2.7.2015 of the State Government.

(2.) A third prayer made by the petitioner is for directing the authorities to undertake the exercise of rotation of the wards in the manner of reservation of seats as according to the petitioner, the provisions of Section 12(2) provides for undertaking such an exercise after two consecutive elections which according to the petitioner has already taken place in 2007 and 2010.

(3.) Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam has appeared for the petitioner while the State is represented by Mr. P.K. Verma, learned AAG 5 and Mr. Kinkar Kumar learned S.C.27 and the State Election Commission is represented by Mr. Amit Srivastava and Mr. Sanjiv Nikesh and Katihar Municipal Corporation is represented by Mr. Vinay Ranjan.