High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/1671/2016dismissed

Pooja v. Anjana Sahu

2016-07-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1671 of 2016 • Pooja W/o Setram Sahu, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Chisda, Police Station Hasaud, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Anjana Sahu W/o Shatrughan Sahu, Aged About 46 Years

2. Kumari Sahu

3. Fuleshwari W/o Gendram, Aged About 42 Years All are R/o Village Chisda, P. S. Hasaud, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh)

4. Rohit Patel, ( Returning OfÏcer)

5. Returning OfÏcer Of Voting Center No. 264 ( Primary School Chisda)

6. Returning OfÏcer Of Voting Center No. 265

7. Returning OfÏcer Of Voting Center No. 266

8. Returning OfÏcer Of Voting Center No. 267

9. Returning OfÏcer Of Voting Center No. 268 10.Returning OfÏcer Of Voting Center No. 269 Returning No.4 to 10 through OfÏce At Tahsil OfÏce Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh) 11.Returning OfÏcer ( Division), Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. Anchal Kharya, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra

Order On Board 11/7/2016

1. Heard.

2. The Election Tribunal has dismissed the petitioner's application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and consequently, the Election Petition filed under Section 122 of the C.G. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 has been dismissed, as barred by limitation.

3. In the matter of Ansar Ahmad Vs. Sub-Divisional OfÏcer, Kairana and others, AIR 1998 Allahabad 341 and Anwari Basavaraj Patil and others Vs. Siddarmaiah and others, AIR 1994 SC 512, the Supreme Court has held that the provisions contained in Section 5 of the Limitation Act do not apply to the Election Petitions, therefore, delay in filing Election Petition cannot be condoned.

4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Election Tribunal i.e. the Sub Divisional OfÏcer (Revenue), Sakti Ditrict Jangjir-Champa, has not committed any illegality by dismissing the Election Petition as barred by limitation.

5. The writ petition being devoid of any substance, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Shyna