IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA5PUR Wri'l' Peti'rion (C) No. «9—71 L3 ^V /2o14

«f/ /

I,

éob\

C

r

m

E

PETITIONERS :1. Chin'ra Ram Sahu S/o. Sakhamm Sahu aged abouT ³³ year's, Occupation AgricuHur'isf, R/o, ViHage Limgaon, 6mm Panchaya'r Limgaon, Thana— Sarangarh, Civil & Revenue Disf'r: Raigarh ( CG.)

2. Kushal Kumar Sahu,'S/o. Sefr'am Sahu, aged abouT ²⁸ Year's, Occupa'rion Agriculturis'r, R/o, Village Kedar, Gram Panchaya'r Kedar, Thana— Sarangar'h, Civil 6i Revenue Disli: Raigarh ( CG.)

3. Banshidhar S/o. Shri Mangal Sahu, aged abouT 33 Years, Occupal'ion Agriculturis'l, R/o, Village Amaldiha, Gram Panchaya'r Amaldiha, Thana- Sarangarh, Civil (Si Revenue Dislt— Raigarh ( CG.)

Bodhir'am Sahu S/o. Shri Ramlal Sahu, aged abouT 45 Years, Occupafion Agricullurisf, R/o, Village Amalipali ( A), Gram Panchayal Amalipali ( A), Thana-Sarangarh, Civil (Si Revenue Dish".- Raigarh ( CG.)

Man Mohan Bariha S/o. Shri Goverdhan Bariha, aged abouf 25 Years, Occupaiion Agriculfuris'r, R/o, Village Deogaon ( PaTharipali) , Gram Panchayaf Deogaon ( Pa'rharipali), Thana— Sarangarh, Civil & Revenue Disfl': Raigarh ( CG.)

Namkar'an Sidar' S/o. Shri Punir'am Sidar', aged abou'r 37 Year's, R/o, Village Chhind , Gram PanchayaT Chhind, Thana- Sarangar'h, Civil & Revenue Dish".— Raigar'h ( CG.)

VERSUS

RESPONDENTS

\

• 1] S'raTe of Chha'r'risgarh, Through: SecreTary Panchayal and Rural Developmen'r DeparTmenT, Mahanadi Bhawan, Manfralaya, Capil'al Complex, Naya Raipur', Dis'rr'icf Raipur (C.G.)
• 2] STaTe of Chha'r'risgar'h, Through: Secre'rary General Adminisfra'h've Deparlmen'r, Mahanadi Bhawan, Man'rmlaya, Capilal Complex, Naya Raipur, Dis'rm'cf Raipur (C.G.)
• 3. Collecl'or', Raigar'h, Civil and Revenue Dis'rric'r — Raigar'h (C.G.)

g2

V

RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA W

^w ' w

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR

Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kdmar Mishra, J.

Writ Petition (C) No.2577 of 2014

Pe{itioner

Versus

Ramprasad

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2146 of ²⁰¹⁴

Geja Ram

Petitioner

Respondents

Respondents

Petitioner

Respondents

Petitioner

Versus State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2147 of ²⁰¹⁴

Sauki Lai Bariha

' Versus

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ PetitiOnjC) No.2150 of 2014

Khage'shwar Ratre

Jaduram Ratre

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (£3) No.2151 of ²⁰¹⁴

Petitioner

Respondents

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Ws

Writ Petition (C) No.2148 of ²⁰¹⁴

Versus

Writ Petition (C) No.2294 of ²⁰¹⁴

Versus

Writ Petition (C) No.231 ⁶ of ²⁰¹ ⁴

Versus

Writ Petition (C) No.2252 of 2014

Versus

Rajkumar Ogre

Petitioner

Babuiai Chouhan

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Chinta Ram Sahu and others

State of Chhattisgarh and others

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Respondents

Petitioners

Respondents

Petitioner

Respondents

Petitioner

Respondents

Petitioner

Ws

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Dhruv Narayan Miri

Writ Petition (C) No.2314 of ²⁰¹⁴

Setram Bada

Versus State of Chhattisgarh and another

Writ Petition (C) No.231 ⁵ of ²⁰¹⁴

Prem Lai

Versus State of Chhattisgarh and others

B§§EQ£QeJEs

Petitioner

Writ Petition (C) No.2343 of 2014

Petitioner Harishankar Lahare

Res'pondents State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2352 of ²⁰¹⁴

Versus

Petitioner Panchu Ram Sonwani

Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2353 of 2014

Petitioner Bhukan Lai Sinha

Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2357 of ²⁰¹⁴

Petitioners Subhash Kurre and others

Versus

Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2374 of 2014

Petitioner Dewnarayan Chandrakar

Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2387 of ²⁰¹⁴

Petitioner Awadhesh Singh Gautam

Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition (C) No.2431 of 2014

Versus

Petitioner

Manglu Ram Sahu

Manoharial Dhruv

Respondents

Writ Petition (C) No.2394 of 2014

Petitioner

Respondents

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh and others

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Writ Petition' (C) No.25e4 oi ²⁰¹⁴

Petitioner

Bharat Pai

Versus

Respondents

i

i

State of Chhattisgarh and anoher ^t

And

Writ Petition (C) No.2590 of 2014

Petitioners

Prashant Verma and another

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh and others

Respondents

Present :— Shri J.S. K.K. Singh, Shri A.H. Syed, Shri Dheeraj Wankhede, Shri CR. Sahu, Shri Sameer Singh, Shri P.K. Patel, Shri J.N. Nande, Shri Ravindra Agrawai, Shri Vikram Dixit, Shri Manoj Paranjape, Shri Baraik, A.N. Pandey and Shri Sunii Sahu, Advocates for the respective petitioners.

Shri Prafuli Bharat, Additional Advocate General with Shri S. Rathore, Dy. Government Advocate for the State.

Shri R.S. Marhas, AdVocate for the respondent/State Eiection Commission

ORAL ORDER

(Passed on this 8th day of January, 2015)

Kw...

/. § . 07") ~\W/

iMa

• The present batch of writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners assaiiing the reservation/delimitation of wards of Gram Panchayats/Janpad Panchyats/Zila Panchayats, as the case may be.
• The petitioners of WP (C) Nos.2146, 2147, 2150, 2151, 2148, 2294, 2316, 2315, 2352, 2353 & 2374 of 2014 have aisochaiienged the order passed by the concerned Coilector under Section 33—A of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, ¹⁹⁹³ (for short 'the Adhiniyam, 1993'), to cancel/recaii the reservation atready made and making fresh reservation.
• According to the petitioners, power under Section 33-A of the Adhiniyam, 1993 can be exerCised only to correct the cierical error whereas the cOncer'ned Collector has recalled the entire earlier notification for some of the blocks on the reasoning that earlier there is some illegality while making reservation.
• Admittedly, the State Election Commission has issued a notification on 23.12.2014 notifying the schedule of elections of Gram Panchayats/Janpad Panchyats/Zila Panchayats.

Thus, the election process has already commenced and any interference with the reservation/delimitation of seats made in Gram Panchayats or Janpad Panchyats or Zila Panchayats, as the case may be, at the stage, would have the effect of interfering with the election process, which is not at all permissible in view of the provisions contained under Article 243—0 of the Constitution of lndia.

5.1 'ln view of the abOVe, all the writ petitions are dismissed, _ however, the issue as to whether the kind of order under challenge can be passed by the Collector under Section 33-A of the Adhiniyam, 1993 is left open to be decided in an Sdlappropriate case.

Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge

Gowri