1 2025:CGHC:54032 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5673 of 2025 Smt. Sughari Biyaar W/o Shri Shankar Biyaar Aged About 54 Years Caste Biyaar (General) (Wrongly Mentioned In General In Election Petition), R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Wadrafnagar, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Devisonam Singh W/o Ramdev Jagate Aged About 36 Years Caste- Gond, (Schedule Tribe) R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Jaikunwar Singh W/o Birbal Singh Uike Aged About 36 Years Caste- Gond (Schedule Tribe), R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5 - Smt. Jyoti Gond W/o Shri Bindeshwar Tekaam Aged About 35 Years Caste- Gond (Schedule Tribe), R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 2 6 - Smt. Kaushaliya Gond W/o Jeevat Lal Porte Aged About 55 Years Caste- Gond (Schedule Tribe), R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 7 - Smt. Lalita Singh W/o Shri Shyamsundar Singh Aged About 28 Years Caste- Gond (Schedule Tribe), R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 8 - Smt. Seetakunwar Agariya W/o Rajendrasay Agariya Aged About 37 Years Caste- Agariya (Schedule Tribe), R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 9 - Smt. Amrawati Biyaar W/o Shri Anil Biyaar Aged About 35 Years Caste- Biyaar (General), R/o Village And Post Mahewa, Police Station- Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 10 - Returning Officer/ Tahsildar Wadrafnagar District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondents 1,2 & 10/State : Mr. Praveen Das, Deputy Advocate General (Hon’ble Justice Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge) Order on Board 06/11/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records from the oce of the respondents in respect of petitioner’s claim. 3 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 22.09.2025 passed in Election Petition Case No. 1/2024-2025 Clause A-89 Village Mahewa by respondent no. 2 and directed to conduct the election petition as per provisions of Civil Procedure Code. 10.3 That, any other Wrti, order directions or relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem 1t may kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is a returned candidate and her election to the post of Sarpanch of Village Panchayat Mahewa, Basantpur, Tehsil Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh has put to challenge by way of filing this writ petition under Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Election Petition, Corrupt Practice and Disqualification Rule 1995). After receipt of the notice petitioner (returned candidate) appeared and have also submitted reply to the election petition and thereafter the case straight away fixed for orders. The said proceedings were objected by the election petitioner and only thereafter the case was fixed for recording of the evidence by the Election Tribunal. He further submits that the proceedings in an election petition based on the pleadings issues are required to be framed. On the basis of issues framed, parties enter into the witness box to prove their case. In the case at hand issues have not been framed and therefore, proceedings of the election petition be stayed till the respondents cause appearance. 3. Counsel for the State opposes the submission made by counsel for petitioner and would submit that petitioner had submitted the reply and thereafter the case was fixed for recording of evidence. The election petitioners witnesses have submitted their affidavit under Order 18 Rule 4 to which the petitioner herein (returned candidate) was cross- examined and therefore, no further interference in the proceedings is required. 4. I have heard learned counsel for respective parties and also perused the documents enclosed with this writ petition. 4 5. The petitioner has filed the pleadings of both the sides as Annexure P- 2 and Annexure P-3. The order sheets of the Election Tribunal is placed on record as Annexure P-1. Perusal of Annexure P-1 does not reflect that the election tribunal based on the pleadings made by respondent parties have formulated issues for consideration and adjudication. For trial of election petition filed under Section 122 of Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam 1993 legislature has formulated the Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Election Petition Corrupt Practices and disqualification Membership Rules 1995). Rule 11 of Rules 1995 envisages about the procedures before the specified Officers and their powers. Under sub-rule 1 of Rule 11 it is provided that subject to the provisions of these rules every election petition shall be enquire into by the specified officers as nearly, as maybe, in accordance with the procedure applicable under the Code of 1908 to the trial of all suits. Under Code of Civil Procedure there is specific provision for framing of the issues based on the pleadings made by the parties and it is for the parties to lead evidence on the issues to be framed by the Trial Court. 6. In the case at hand the order sheets which is placed on record does not mention that after submission of the pleadings by the respective parties, the election tribunal has formulated issues for consideration and decision. 7. In the aforementioned facts of the case Election Tribunal has not proceeded in accordance with the Rules of 1995, fixing the case for recording evidence after formation of the issues which in the opinion of this Court is not in accordance with the Rules of 1995. 8. For the forgoing discussion and to limited submission made by learned counsel for both the parties, the case is still at the stage of recording evidence, this Court is not to decide the rights of the parties, but grievances of the petitioner is against the procedure adopted by the election tribunal to trial the election petition. In the above facts of the case, I am of the considered view that issuing notice to other side, staying the proceeding of election tribunal will not be in the interest of parties and would delay the proceedings and therefore, I find it 5 appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at admission stage without issuing any notice to the respondents herein. 9. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Election Tribunal is directed to formulate issues based on the pleadings submitted by respective parties and thereafter to grant liberty to both the sides to lead evidence and thereafter to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 10. Deputy Advocate General is directed to inform Election Tribunal about the orders passed by this Court. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE alfiza ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.11.10 17:35:46 +0530