Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 225 (ALL)

Kuldeep Singh Chahal v. State of U. P. & Ors.

2013-01-17

SATYA POOT MEHROTRA, ZAKI ULLAH KHAN

body2013
Zaki Ullah Khan, J.;— Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. Nil of 2013 and Civil Misc. (Stay) Application No. Nil of 2013 have been filed today on behalf of the petitioner. Registry is directed to give appropriate numbers to the aforesaid Applications. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, inter-alia, praying for directing the respondents to make final determination of constituencies as per the circular of the Registrar dated 18.5.2009. By the aforesaid Amendment Application, filed today, it has been brought on record that final determination of constituencies has since been done by the Order dated 13.1.2013. By the aforesaid Amendment Application, the petitioner seeks to challenge the said Order dated 13.1.2013. We have heard Sri Irshad Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C. B. Yadav, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri K.R. Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Sri C.B. Yadav, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 has brought to the notice of the Court that the elections in respect of the Central Cooperative Society in question (District Cooperative Bank Ltd.) have already been notified on 11.1.2013. In view of the statement made by Sri C.B. Yadav, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, it is evident that the election process has already started. In the circumstances, we are of the view that it will not be appropriate for this Court to exercise its Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the present case, so as to hinder the on-going election process. After the elections are over, it will be open to the petitioner to pursue such remedy, as may be available to the petitioner under law, before appropriate Forum for seeking appropriate reliefs for redressal of his alleged grievances, as raised in the Writ Petition. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed, and the same is accordingly dismissed subject to the observations made above. _____________