Rajan Roy - (1.) (C.M. Application No. Nil of 2019) Heard on the application for amendment filed by the petitioner today.
(2.) By means of this application various facts and grounds are sought to be added in the writ petition primarily contending that the Election Petition was not presented by the election petitioner herself but through her Advocate, therefore, it was not maintainable being in violation of Section 12-C(3) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act, 1947') and Section 81(1) of the Representation of People's Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as ''the to the applicant No.2Act, 1951' ), secondly, the Election petitioner had herself obtained a fraudulent caste certificate in the earlier election of the office of Gaon Sabha.
(3.) Sri M.A. Khan learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Mohdammad Aslam Khan on behalf of opposite party no.3 has raised an objection to the acceptance of this amendment application as according to him these facts cannot be asserted before the writ Court for the first time when the same have not been raised before the Prescribed Authority. Moreover, he says that even otherwise the assertions sought to be added are factual and are belied from the documents which are annexed with the amendment application, which show that the election petition was presented on 11.01.2015 by the election petitioner in person and there is an order of the Sub Divisional Officer of the same date on the first page of Election Petition written by hand, recording her presence. Moreover he says that the affidavit as also the verification of Election Petition bear the thumb impression of the Election Petitioner of the date on which the election petition was presented and at the bottom it is mentioned ''through Sri Rajendra Prasad Misra Advocate' which is only an endorsement of the fact that the said Advocate was to do pairvi of the case and not that the petition was being presented by Sri Rajendra Prasad Misra Advocate in the absence of the election petitioner. As regards para 44 (L) of the amendment petition he says that allegation pertains to the earlier election to the office of Gram Pradhan when the office was reserved for Other Backward Class (OBC) and proceedings had taken place upto the State level and the opposite party no.3 was deprived from performing the duties of the office of the Gram Pradhan based on the cancellation of (OBC) caste certificate which has no bearing on the subsequent election in which the office was not reserved for (OBC) but was for general category.;