- (1.) The petitioner in this writ petition dated April 15th, 2008 is seeking a mandamus commanding the respondents to permit him to submit papers as a candidate for Purba Medinipur Zilla Parishad, and also to cast his vote in the ensuing three tier Panchayat elections. He is also seeking an order cancelling the subtraction electoral roll published on January 1st, 2008 in so far as he is concerned. In terms of direction of the West Bengal Election Commission, the Panchayat Electoral Registration Officer and Sub-Divisional Officer, Tamluk published the electoral roll concerned adopting it from the relevant part of the electoral roll prepared for the assembly election. The petitioner s name was put on it to which was appended a subtraction roll on which also his name was put. It is his case that feeling aggrieved, he submitted an application to the electoral registration officer for inclusion of his name in the roll, and that though the electoral registration officer heard him, no step was taken for including his name in the roll, and as a result, though nominated by his party, he is unable to submit his papers for contesting the election as a candidate. Mr Bihani, counsel for the election commission, submits that in view of the provisions of s.23 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the apex court decision in Shyamdeo Pd. Singh v. Nawal Kishore Yadav, (2000) 8 SCC 46, this writ petition is not maintainable, since in terms of the notification already issued and published by the commission today is the last date for making nominations. To this, counsel for the petitioner submits that an interim order should be made permitting the petitioner to submit papers and contest the election subject to the result of the writ petition. In my view, the first question is whether the writ petition should be entartained at all.
(2.) The electoral roll was published as back as January 1st, 2008. From the receipt at page 22 issued on behalf of the electoral registration officer, it is apparent that the petitioner s application was received by the office of the authority only on April 4th, 2008. Copy of the application submitted by him has not been produced. He has produced only a copy of his representation dated April 10th, 2008 requesting the electoral registration officer to include his name in the electoral roll. It is therefore evident that he did not take immediate steps for submitting application in terms of the provisions of s.23 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
(3.) There is no explanation why he waited for more than three months and decided to approach the writ court only after the order was issued and published by the commission notifying the election programme. Mr Bihani is right in saying that in view of the provisions of s.23 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the apex court decision he has cited to me, no step can be taken for amendment, transposition or deletion of any entry in the electoral roll after the last date for making nominations for an election. Though in terms of the notification today is the last date for making nominations, in my opinion, at this grossly belated stage the writ powers should not be exercised to direct the electoral registration officer to amend the electoral roll that was published as back as January 1st, 2008. For these reasons, I dismiss the writ petition. There shall be no order for costs. Urgent certified xerox copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties, if applied for, within three days from the date of receipt of the file by the section concerned.;