ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 15.01.2021 passed by the High Court of Manipur at Imphal in MC (El.Petn) No. 19 of 2020, whereby the High Court directed production of documents at Serial Nos. 15 to 20, referred to in paragraph 14 of the impugned judgment. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. The matter had reached this court on the earlier occasion at the instance of the respondents which was disposed of, being SLP(C) No. 10804 of 2019 on 05.03.2020. 5. While dealing with the request in respect of same documents at serial Nos. 15 to 20, the court noted thus: “...Similarly, document(s) in Schedule II, except referred to in serial Nos. 15 to 20 of that Schedule, the petitioner would be in a position to produce the same being public document(s). In so far as the document(s) at serial Nos. 15 to 20 in Schedule-II, copy of the same can be obtained by the petitioner only if the Court so orders in terms of the relevant Rules 92 and 93 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, as the case may be. That request can be considered by the court subject to relevancy of the document(s) in the context of averment made in the election petition and just exceptions as may be available in law to the opposite party. We accede to the request of the petitioner to approach the High Court in respect of document(s) at Serial Nos. 15 to 20 of Schedule II, which application be decided on its own merits afresh by the High Court document-wise, about the relevancy and necessity to produce the same subject to just exceptions. The petition is at liberty to apply to the concerned authorities for obtaining public document(s) (other than mentioned in serial Nos. 15 to 20 of Schedule-II) as per the rules applicable in that regard...” 6. After this order, the respondents once again requested the High Court to order production of documents at Serial Nos. 15 to 20. That request has been favourably answered by the High Court vide impugned judgment and order on the finding that the stated documents are relevant to resolve the disputes involved in the main election petition. After this order, the respondents once again requested the High Court to order production of documents at Serial Nos. 15 to 20. That request has been favourably answered by the High Court vide impugned judgment and order on the finding that the stated documents are relevant to resolve the disputes involved in the main election petition. No specific analysis of the pleadings and the evidence already produced by the parties had been adverted to, which can be the basis to answer the matter in issue. The relevancy of the documents needs to be judged in reference to the averments/allegations in the election petition including the oral evidence produced by the parties during the trial. 7. If the grievance of the election petitioner is limited to procedural irregularities, production of ballot papers may not be necessary. Hence, the High Court ought to have clarified, albeit briefly, as to how the stated documents are relevant and in what context. 8. Be that as it may, taking overall view of the matter, we deem it appropriate to relegate the parties before the High Court for reconsideration of the request made by the respondents regarding production of documents at Serial Nos. 15 to 20 referred to in paragraph 14 of the impugned judgment and order. That question be answered appropriately after analyzing relevant pleadings including the evidence already brought before the court, in the form of affidavit of evidence. 9. All contentions available to both sides are left open, to be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. 10. The application for production of documents moved by the respondents before the High Court is restored to the file of the High Court to its original number for being considered afresh expeditiously. Ordered accordingly. 11. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 12. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.