Ramadhar Ray v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19431 of 2025 ====================================================== Ramadhar Ray Son of Late Chetan Ray, Resident of Village- Mahaji, Panchayat- Badhara Mahaji, P.S- Doriganj, Block- Sadar, Chapra, presently Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj, Badhara Mahaji, Block- Chapra Sadar District- Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi. 2.

The Chief Election Commissioner, the Union of India, New Delhi. 3.

The State of Bihar, through State Election Commisioner, Patna. 4.

The State Election Commissioner, the Bihar State Election Commission, Patna.

5.

The District Magistrate-cum-District Election Officer, Saran at Chapra. 6.

The Block Development Officer-cum-Block Election Officer, Sadar, Chapra, Saran.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok, Advocate Mr.Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Apurva Kumar, CGC Mr. Vikas Kumar, AC to AG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ application has been filed in the form of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for the following reliefs:- "For issuance of appropriate writ/writs or order/orders or direction/directions commanding the respondents to expunge the name of illegal voters of Gram Panchayat, Badhara Mahaji, BlockChapra Sadar (Saran) as some of them have permanently shifted to Vishunpur, Shankar Nagar

Patna High Court CWJC No.19431 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026 2/2 Nigam and Rouja and enjoy their voting rights at that place. It is relevant to mention here that names of these voters continued to remain in existence at their earlier place too i.e. Gram Panchayat Badhara, Mahaji, and has not been removed even after SIR(Special Intensive Revision)"

3. Upon perusal of record, it appears that the petitioner has already submitted a representation before Respondent No. 5 for redressal of his grievance vide AnnexureP/4 dated 06.10.2025.

4. Accordingly, Respondent No. 5 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.10.2025 and pass an appropriate order, after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders, in accordance with law.

5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ application stands disposed of.

6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(Sudhir Singh, ACJ) (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Sujit/- U