SUKATI Vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION (PANCHAYAT)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; State Election Commission; respondent no. 6. Though the private respondents no. 7 to 16 were duly noticed and served, nobody appeared on their behalf when the case was heard.

(2.) The petitioner has moved the Court for the following reliefs:

(3.) The controversy is that the petitioner was not the person who he claims to be and rather another person and on the ground of such impersonation, he was not allowed to cast his vote for the said election. Thereafter on the very next date, a complaint was filed by the respondent no. 6 before the State Election Commission with regard to such misconduct, misrepresentation and fraud played on the part of the petitioner. The respondent no. 6 was also a contestant for the said post. The State Election Commission by order communicated in the letter of the Secretary dated 28.05.2016, copy of which is Annexure-7 to the writ application, has rejected the candidature of the petitioner for the said post. The same is impugned in the present writ application.