Aas Jogi vs Laxmi Kattam
2025 Latest Caselaw 3085 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Aas Jogi vs Laxmi Kattam on 17 June, 2025

                                1




                                                       2025:CGHC:24864



                                                                 NAFR

    HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                         WPC No. 2973 of 2025

Aas Jogi W/o Aas Lachchha Aged About 28 Years R/o Village And Post
Arrabor, Tahsil Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh
                                                      ... Petitioner
                                   versus

1 - Laxmi Kattam W/o Kattam Ramesh Aged About 35 Years R/o Village
And Post Arrabor, Tahsil Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh

2 - Smt. Vijya Laxmi Kashyap W/o Samundar Kashyap Primary School
Tarlaguda, At Present Golapalli Tahsil Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh
(Presiding Officer)

3 - Saroj Kunwar W/o Virendra Adhikari Project Office Dornapal, Block
Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh (Presiding Officer)

4 - Smt. Savita Verma W/o Ganesh Ram Verma Primary School Vardeltong,
Block Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh (Presiding Officer)

5 - Smt. Lekhani Netam W/o Gopal Kumar Netam Boys Ashram Konta
(Potacabin), Konta, Block Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh (Presiding
Officer)

6 - Ku. Soyam Subbi D/o Malla Anganbadi Worker, Arrabor, Khaspara No.
5, Tahsil Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh

7 - Returning Officer Girish Nimbalkar, Tahsildar Konta, District Sukma
Chhattisgarh

8 - Assistant Returning Officer Narath Kumar Manjhi, Chief Executive
Officer, Konta, Tahsil Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh

9 - Mukka Salvam S/o Mutta Agent, R/o Village And Post Arrabor, Tahsil
Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh
                                      2




     10 - Soyam Suman S/o Singa Agent, R/o Village And Post Arrabor, Tahsil
     Konta, District Sukma Chhattisgarh.

     11 - Panda Rakesh S/o Papaiya Agent, R/o Village And Post Arrabor, Tahsil
     Konta District Sukma Chhattisgarh.

     12 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) - Cum-Election Tribunal Konta,
     District Sukma Chhattisgarh.
                                                            ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, PL

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma

Order on Board 17/06/2025 Heard.

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the

following relief(s) :

"10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased

to direct the respondent No.12 (Election Tribunal) to

take time bound decision over the election petition of

the petitioner pending before him as Case No.0/A-

89/15/2024-25.

10.2. Any appropriate writ, direction or order may also

kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner, which this

Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the

case."

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the act of the

respondent authorities are illegal, arbitrary and against the law.

Respondent No.1 is enjoying the post of Sarpanch, though she has

received lesser vote and as the dispute of election, where the

respondent No.1 has been elected for the period of five years, the

petitioner seeks time bound disposal of her election petition, pending

before the respondent No.2. He further submits that the law in respect

of early disposal of election petition has also been settled in Rajendra

Singh Rana Vs. Swami Prasad Mourya reported in (2007) 4 SCC

270, Lili Thomas Vs. Union of India reported in (2013) 7 SCC 653,

Sundar Lal Vs. Lachhan Das reported in AIR 1954 SC 221 and

Jyoti Basu Vs. Debi reported in 1982 (1) SCC 691. He further submits

that respondent No. 1 has been erroneously elected for the period of

five years, though she has received less votes and in that aspects, the

election petition is pending since 07.03.2024 and it is settled principles

that the election petition shall be decided on day to day hearing in a

time bound period. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of "Smt.

Rehana Vs. State of UP and Others reported in (2016) 15 SCC 159

had in an election petition directed for time bound disposal.

3. Learned State Counsel not opposes the limited prayer made by counsel

for the petitioner.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents

with utmost circumspection.

5. Considering facts of the case, submissions of counsel for the respective

parties and further considering the fact that the election petition filed

by the petitioner is pending from last three months. Further, consider

the judgment in the case of Smt. Rehana Vs. State of UP and Others

reported in (2016) 15 SCC 159, this writ petition is disposed of

directing the respondent No.12 (Election Tribunal) to consider and

decide the election petition of the petitioner, as expeditiously as

possible as per relevant rules, regulations and law.

6. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of.

C.C. as per rules.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

Vasant