NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

WPMB/661/2025 of USHA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Court
Uttarakhand High Court
Decision date
2025-08-13
Case number
661 of 2025

Parties

Statutes cited (1)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR

AND

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. ALOK MAHRA

Writ Petition (M/B) No. 661 of 2025

13thAugust, 2025

Usha

-Petitioner

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others -Respondents

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Abhijay Negi, learned counsel alongwith Ms. Snigdha Tiwari and Mr. Ayush Pokhriyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned counsel for the State Election Commission.

JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Alok Mahra, J.)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned Standing Counsel for the State and learned counsel for the State Election Commission.

The petitioner and respondent no.3 contested

the election of Member Kshetra Panchayat, Naugaon; that, after filing of the nomination paper, petitioner moved objection against the candidature of respondent no.3 on the ground that her name is reflected in multiple Electoral Rolls; that, the objection was rejected

and thereafter results were declared and respondent no.3 was declared to be elected for the Post of Member Kshetra Panchayat, Naugaon.

By means of the present writ petition, the

petitioner has prayed that writ of mandamus be issued to respondent no.2 to issue clear and specific guidelines in compliance of order dated 11.07.2025 of this Court in Writ Petition (M/B) No.503 of 2025.

4. In the opinion of this Court, the provisions contained under the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016 and the Rules made thereunderare amply clear on the point regarding preparation of Electoral Rolls, which cannot be adjudicated into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

5. Even otherwise also, since results of the elections have already been declared and if petitioner has any grievance regarding registration of respondent no.3 in multiple electoral rolls, then she has an efficacious alternative remedy of filing an Election Petition before the Election Tribunal. Hence, if any Election Petition is filed, the Election Tribunal shall attempt to dispose of the same as expeditiously as

possible.

6. Petition stands ordered accordingly.

_______________

G. NARENDAR, C.J.

Dt: 13[th] August, 2025 UJJWAL

_______________

ALOK MAHRA, J.