High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Smt. Maina Devi v. State Election Comm.U.P. Thru' Commissioner And Others - WRIT - C No. 70487 of 2005  RD-AH 8249 (24 April 2006)
Court No. 1
1. WP No. 70487 of 2005
Smt. Maina Devi vs. State Election Commission and others
2. WP No. 977of 2006
Kaushar Khan vs. State Election Commission and others
3. WP No. 15647 of 2006
Smt. Kanti Devi vs. State of UP and others
4. WP No. 16426 of 2006
Smt. Savitri Devi vs. State of UP and others
Hon'ble Yatindra Singh, J
Hon'ble RK Rastogi, J
1. These four writ petitions are challenging the order passed by the respondents cancelling the elections for Block Pramukh as well as for the members of Block Development Committee and Zila Panchayat after declaration of results. The chart below contains the following details
The post for which the election was held;
The date on which the result was declared; and
The date on which it was cancelled.
Election for the post
Date of declaration
Date of cancellation
70487 of 2005
Member Block Development Committee
977 of 2006
Member Zila Panchayat
15647 of 2006
16426 of 2006
2. We have heard Sri Surya Pratap Yadav, Madhur Prakash, Sri Navin Sinha, Sri NK Pandey, Sri Sudha Pandey. Sri Umesh Narain Sharma, Senior Advocates for the petitioners and Standing Counsel, Sri PN Rai, and Sri WH Khan for the respondents.
3. In these four writ petitions the result of the election was declared on the date mentioned in the chart. Subsequently, the Election Commission for one reason or the other has cancelled the election and has ordered for fresh election. Six different division benches of our court in Kanti vs. District Magistrate, (1999) 2 UPLBEC 771; Shyam Shakhi vs. State Election Commission, (2000) 3 UPLBEC 2097; Shambhoo Singh Vs. State Election Commission, (2000) 4 AWC 2777; Sunita Patel vs. State of UP and others, (2006)1UPLBEC 372; WP 67170 of 2005, Smt. Gulabi vs. State Election Commission decided on 10.11.2005 by Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli, J and Hon'ble Shiv Shanker, J, and WP No. 266 of 2006, Smt. Kamlesh vs. Mukhya Nirvachan Ayukt and others decided on 30.3.2006 by Hon'ble BS Chauhan, J and Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J have held that
When the result of the election has been declared, it cannot be cancelled by the Election Commission; and
The proper way to challenge the election is by means of election petition.
These rulings apply with full force to the facts of the present cases.
4. The counsel for the respondents brought to our notice Rule 28 of UP Zila Panchayat (Election of Pramukhs and UP-Pramukhs and Settlement of Election Disputes) Rules, 1994 and submitted that the returning officer shall declare the result forthwith only in the absence of any direction to the contrary issued by the State Election Commission and not otherwise. It is not disputed that Election Commission has not cancelled the elections on the ground that any specific direction of the Election Commission was not followed by the Returning Officer. In view of this, it is not necessary to go into this issue. In any case the result has been declared. It concludes the issue of consideration of any direction issued by the State Election Commission.
5. In view of these discussions, the writ petitions are allowed. The orders cancelling the elections are quashed. It would be open to the aggrieved persons to challenge the elections by means of election petitions in accordance with law. Let copies of this order be placed in the record of WP Nos. 977 of 2006, 15647 of 2006 and 16426 of 2006.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.