IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.4997 of 2011
AJIJUN NESHA .
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS .
-----------
2. 28.03.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Counsel for the State.
The petitioner seeks inclusion of her name in the voters list of
Village Sundarpur under Gram Panchayat Raj Pachrukha (East) P.S. &
Anchal Banjaria, District East Champaran so as to enable her not only
to caste her vote in the ensuing Panchayat election but also file
nominations for the post of Mukhiya.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that when her name
was left out from the voters list she petitioned the Booth Level Officer
who on 25.2.2010 submitted a list of persons whose names had been
left out in which her name figured at serial 16.This was given to the
BDO cum Assistant Election Registration Officer on 20.7.2010. A fresh
list was submitted by the Block Level Officer on 3.1.2011 to the BDO
cum Assistant Election Registration officer in which her name again
figured at serial 40. The petitioner states that she was asked by the
BDO cum Assistant Election Registration Officer to appear before him
on 4.3.2010 which she did notwithstanding all of which her name was
not added.
The lack of jurisdiction in the Court to grant any relief to the
petitioner after the Panchayat elections have been notified and the
electoral role have achieved finality have been noticed in the order of
this Court in CWJC No. 4723 of 2011 disposed off by this Court on
25.3.2011 in light of the order of a Division Bench of this Court reported
in 2001 (3) PLJR 677.
That however shall not close the issue with regard to the
allegations of dereliction in duty by those responsible for necessary
corrective action by the officials, if what the petitioner contends on facts
be correct.
The District Magistrate, East Champaran is directed to hold an
enquiry by himself after notice to the petitioner and the BLO/BDO. He
shall call for the original orders of the matter and then arrive at a finding
of fact. If he concludes that there was any dereliction duty on the part of
the government officials concerned, it is expected that he shall consider
ordering appropriate departmental action against the concerned so that
in future the citizens are not denied right to franchise merely because of
dereliction of duty by those in whom the Government vested powers in
trust to be used and not abused.
Let such compliance by the District Magistrate be done by a
reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a maximum
period of four months from the date of receipt and or presentation of a
copy of this order before him.
The writ application stands dismissed with the aforesaid
directions.
Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)