RAMROOP YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to this case are these: A notice was issued on the Sub Divisional Officer. Sadar Bhagalpur, and the Block Development Officer of Pirpainty, acting as the Election Officer, Pirpainty Block, Bhagalpur, (opposite party Nos. 4 and 5) in pursuance of an order dated the 17th July 1967, passed in Civil Writ Jurisdiction case No. 307 of 1967 (Ramroop Yadav v. The State of Bihar and others) to show cause, why a proceeding for contempt should not be started against them.

(2.) Ramroop Yadav had filed an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, against (1) The State of Bihar, (2) The District Magistrate of Bhagalpur, (3) The District Panchayat Officer, Bhagalpur, (4) The Sub-divisional Officer, Bhagalpur and (5) The Block Development Officer, acting as the Election Officer, Pirpainty Block, Bhagalpur, for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the notification no, 5411/G.P. dated the 26th April. 1967. published in the Bihar Gazette on the 10th May, 1967 and issued under Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act 1947, with regard to the addition and subtraction of some areas to and from, the jurisdiction of the Gram Panchayat in pursuance of which the election of the Gram Panchayat was to be held, and he had made a prayer for staying the election of the Parasurampur Gram Panchayat which was to be held on the 28th May, 1967. That application was registered as Civil Writ Jurisdiction case No. 307 of 1967. That application was admitted on. the 25th May. 1967, and an ad interim stay of the holding of the election was granted pending the final hearing of the application. On the same day (i. e., the 25th May, 1967), the Deputy Registrar of this Court sent a copy of that order, along with a copy of the writ petition to the Block Development Officer. Pirpainty (Bhagalpur), for his information and guidance and for immediate communication of the said order to all concerned, vide memo No. 5652 dated the 25th. May, 1967. On the same date, Mr. Prem Shan-kar Sahay, Advocate for the petitioner in Civil Writ Jurisdiction case No. 307 of 1967. sent a letter to Ramroop Yadav, informing him that the High Court had passed an order staying the election of the Parasurampur Gram Panchayat and the stay order would be communicated in course of the day. He asked Ramroop Yadav to inform the Block Development Officer (Election Officer) Pirpainty. to stop the election. A copy of this letter is enclosed with the application filed on the 7th June, 1967, and marked Annexure '2'. On the same day, the said learned Counsel sent a telegram (Annexure '1') to one Shivanand Tiwary (the petitioner in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 306 of 1967), informing him that the High Court had stayed the election of Parasurampur and Kali Prasad Panchayats. The learned counsel asked the addressee to inform the Election Officer about the said order. On the 26th May, 1967, Ramroop Yadav, who was a candidate for the Mukhiyaship of the Parasurampur Gram Panchayat, filed an application (copy marked Annexuer '3') before the Election Officer, Pirpainty, bringing to his notice that the High Court had stayed the election of the Parasurampur Gram Panchayat, scheduled to be held on the 28th May, 1967. In support of this version, he enclosed true copies of the letter and the telegram sent by Mr. Prem Shankar Sahay, and made a prayer to stay the election of the Parasurampur Gram Panchayat. On. the 27th May, 1967, the Block Development Officer, who was acting as the Election Officer, sent a letter to the Sub-divisional Officer, Bhagalpur, informing him that Ramroop Yadav and Shivanand Tiwary, candidates for the Mukhiyaship of the Gram Panchayats Parasurampur and Kaliprasad, respectively, had produced before him a telegram and a letter received by them from an Advocate of the High Court, Patna, stating therein that the High Court had stayed the election of those Panchayats in cases Nos. 306 and 307 of 1967, and, there was a request on their behalf to stay the election, which was to be held on the 28th May, 1967, and the 30th May, 1967, respectively. The Block Development Officer enclosed the copies of the letter and the telegram with his letter, and sought for instructions for taking further steps in the matter of the election. He, however, pointed it out that he had not received any order from the High Court or from any other higher authority. The Sub-Divisional Officer made a note on this letter that the opinion of either the Public Prosecutor or the Government Pleader should be taken. Opinion of the Government Pleader was obtained on the 27th May, 1967, and that was to the following effect:--

(3.) A copy of the order of this Court, passed in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 307 of 1967, staying the election was received by opposite party No. 5 on the 29th May, 1967, but by that time, the election of the Mukhiya of Parasurampur Gram Panchayat was already over, and one Govind Mandal was elected as the Mukhiya of the said Gram Panchayat. On receipt of the said order of this Court, election of the other Gram Panchayat (Kali Prasad) scheduled to be held on the 30th May, 1967, was stayed.