Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88951 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 11559 of 2023 Petitioner :- Smt. Anuradhika Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Himanshu Singh,J.P. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Santosh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J. 1. Petitioner before this Court had contested the election of Block Pramukh alongwith respondent no. 2 in the month of July 2021. The counting took place on 10.7.2021 and election result was declared on the said date. Respondent no. 2 was declared elected. Thereafter, election petitioner had instituted an Election Petition No. 8 of 2021 before the District Judge, Azamgarh on 9.8.2021. The returned candidate/respondent no. 2 on 15.9.2023 had moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC before the election tribunal, on the ground that the election petition was not maintainable as it was not presented by the election petitioner as mandated under the act. It was further alleged in the said application that election petition be dismissed. The court below after recording the contention of both the parties had proceeded to allow the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and dismissed the election petition filed by the election petitioner. Hence, present writ petition. 2. Sri J.P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for election petitioner, submits that no finding has been recorded by the court below while allowing the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and rejecting the election petition. According to him only the order dated 9.8.2021 has been taken into consideration by the court below on the basis of which application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been allowed. 3. Sri Rakesh Pande, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the returned candidate, submits that the election petition was required to be presented by the election petitioner herself and from perusal of the order dated 9.8.2021 it is clear that it was presented by the election petitioner through her counsel and not by herself. According to him, the election petition is not maintainable and there are catena of judgments which clearly establishes the fact that the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC needs to be allowed and election petition to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 5. The short point involved for consideration before this Court is as to whether the court below was correct in dealing with application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and allowing the same. From perusal of the order impugned dated 27.10.2023 it is clear that the court below has recorded the contention of both the parties, it has thereafter noticed the provision of Order VII Rule 11 CPC and, thereafter, in a cryptic manner has only relied upon the order dated 9.8.2021 by which the election petition was registered which was filed by the election petitioner and the court below, thereafter, considering number of cases decided by Supreme Court and coordinate Bench of this Court has proceeded to allow the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and dismissed the election petition. Specific ground was taken by the election petitioner that she herself presented the election petition and her signatures had been endorsed on the order sheet and she was only accompanied by her counsel when election petition was presented. 6. The objections raised to the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC have not been considered by the court below and no finding has been recorded as to whether the signatures of the election petitioner is there on the order sheet or not. The court below has proceeded to reject the election petition solely on the ground that the order dated 9.8.2021 only records the fact that election petition was presented by the election petitioner alongwith her counsel. 7. This Court finds that the objections raised by the election petitioner before the court below have not been considered and in a cryptic manner the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been allowed and election petition has been dismissed. It is not the intention of the courts to dismiss the election petition in such a cursory manner without recording any finding to the objections raised by any of the party to the election petition. In the instant case, there is specific objection on the part of the election petitioner as to her signatures on the order sheet when election petition was presented. No such finding has been recorded by the court below. 8. In view of the said fact, writ petition stands partly allowed. The order dated 27.10.2023 passed by the Election Tribunal/Additional District & Sessions Judge/FTC-2, Azamgarh in Election Petition No. 8 of 2021 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the court below to consider the objections filed by the election petitioner as to the application filed by returned candidate under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and record specific finding as to whether the election petitioner has not signed the order sheet while presenting the election petition or not. The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out by the court below, in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Shekhar Digitally signed by :- SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad