1 CGHC010259802022 2026:CGHC:28434 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3512 of 2022 1 - Prakash Chandrakar S/o Late Chhagan Lal Chandrakar Aged About 48 Years R/o Shankar Nagar, Ward No. 1, Mahasamund, Distt. - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Election Commission Nirvachan Bhawan Sector - 19, North Block Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector And District Election Officer (Local Body Elections), Mahasamund, Distt.- Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 3 - Bhagawat Jaiswal Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Mahasamund, Distt.- Mahasamund Chhattisgarh Presiding Officer For Election Of Presedent Of Nagar Palika Parishad, Mahasamund. 4 - Smt. Rashi Tribhuwan Mahilang W/o Tribhuwan Mahilang Aged About 48 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Bazar Ward, Mahasamund, Distt.- Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 5 - Nagar Palika Parishad Mahasamund, Distt.- Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Chetna Sharma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rajnish Singh Baghel, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. S. S. Choubey, G.A. For Respondent(s) No. 4 : Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/Intervenor : Mr. Rijwan Alam, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Surfaraj Khan, Advocate. For Respondent No. 5 : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 09/07/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “1. Hon'ble Court may be kind and gracious enough to call for the records of the case from the respondents. 2. Hon'ble Court may be kind be pleased to set aside and quash the whole proceeding pertaining to the election of President of Municipal Council, Mahasamund, dated 04.08.2022 by issuance of writ of mandamus or certiorari, or any other appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders. 3. Hon'ble Court may direct for inquiry into collusion and nexus of respondent no.3 and 4 and further direct appropriate legal action against them by issuance of appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders. 3 4. Any other relief/relief's which Hon'ble court may deem fit in 4. the facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been preferred calling in question the illegal, arbitrary and void action on the part of respondent No. 3, whereby the nomination form submitted by respondent No. 4 for the post of President of respondent No. 5, namely, Nagar Palika Parishad, Mahasamund, was accepted after expiry of the prescribed time stipulated for submission and acceptance of nomination papers. He further submits that the entire exercise was undertaken solely with a view to accommodate respondent No. 4, who was admittedly not present within the stipulated time for submission of her nomination form. It is further contended that respondent No. 4, by exercising undue influence upon respondent No. 3, succeeded in getting her nomination form accepted beyond the prescribed time limit and, acting under such influence, respondent No. 3 proceeded in a manner wholly contrary to the applicable statutory provisions and the procedure prescribed under law. Learned counsel further submits that acceptance of the nomination form beyond the stipulated period vitiates the entire process and renders the action of respondent No. 3 unsustainable in the eyes of law. He, therefore, contends that the impugned action of respondent No. 3 is ex facie illegal, arbitrary, without authority of law and contrary to the prescribed procedure and, as such, 4 warrants interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the tenure of respondent No. 4 in respect of the post in question has already expired and, therefore, no effective or substantive relief can now be granted to the petitioner in the present proceedings. He further submits that, in view of the subsequent developments and expiry of the tenure of respondent No. 4, the cause of action sought to be agitated by the petitioner no longer survives for consideration. It is, therefore, contended that the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous and deserves to be disposed of as such. 4. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and having perused the material available on record, it is evident that the principal grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition pertains to the acceptance of the nomination form of respondent No. 4 for the post of President of respondent No. 5, Nagar Palika Parishad, Mahasamund. However, during the pendency of the present writ petition, the tenure of respondent No. 4 in respect of the post in question has already come to an end. In view of the aforesaid subsequent development, the relief sought for by the petitioner no longer survives for consideration and no effective relief can be granted by this Court at this stage. Thus, the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous by efflux of time. 5 5. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat