Dr.Suresh Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6741 of 2006 =========================================================== Dr.Suresh Prasad Yadav, son of Sri Singheshwari Prasad Yadav, resident of village- Lalapatti, P.O- Gahumani, Police Station- Singheshwar, DistrictMadhepura. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Chief Election Commissioner, State Election Commission, Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate-cum-District Election Officer, Panchayat, Madehpura. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

None.

For the State : Mr. GP-18 For State Election Commissions: Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-09-2018 Despite repeated calls, no body appears on behalf of the petitioner.

2.

This writ petition was filed by the petitioner on 25.05.2006 with a prayer for quashing the order Call No. 235 as contained in Annexure- 2 to the writ petition issued by the District Magistrate-cum-District Election Officer, Panchayat, Madhepura by which he was appointed as a member of Patrolling-cum-Ballot Box Collection Party (Security Units) and was directed to report on 13.05.2006, 19.05.2006 and 30.05.2006 at Collectorate Campus, Madhepura and was also directed to receive ballot papers, ballot

Patna High Court CWJC No.6741 of 2006 dt.10-09-2018 2/2 boxes and other materials from Alam Nagar, Udakishunganj and Murliganj on 15.05.2006, 21.05.2006 and 30.05.2006 respectively and deposit the same. A prayer has also been made by the petitioner to direct the respondent not to force him to discharge duties relating to election work.

3.

It would appear from perusal of the record that the petitioner, at the relevant time, was Lecturer in K. P. College, Murliganj, Madhepura in Department of Physics. He was aggrieved due to the fact that being a Lecturer, he was asked to do election duty during panchayat election. Since the issue relates to 2006 election, which had already been held and, thereafter, successive elections of Panchayat have also been held, the writ petition has become infructuous.

4.

In that view of the matter, it is dismissed as infructuous. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Kanchan/Sneha AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date11.09.2018 Transmission Date