AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The complainant has filed the subject contempt petition alleging disobedience of the interim order dated 27.12.2019 by which, this Court had directed the second respondent to permit him to participate and cast his vote in the ensuing election and further direction was issued to republish the list of eligible voters.
An order is passed on 02.01.2020 by the respondents including the number of the writ petition that is filed by the petitioner and they would undertake before this Court that the mentioning of the writ petition number in the order dated 02.01.2020 would be enough and the complainant would be permitted to cast his vote.
The submission of the second respondent is that the complainant would be permitted to cast his vote in the ensuing elections stated to be held on 19.01.2020 on the strength of Annexure-G without any further clarification with regard to his name not being in the eligible list of voters which is already produced at Annexure-C.
The submission of the second respondent that the complainant would be permitted to cast his vote is placed on record.
The complainant contends that due to the inaction of the second respondent he is not able to contest the elections by filing the nomination papers. But the fact emains that the complainant has not filed his nomination papers to enable him to contest the elections. In the circumstances, if at all the complainant is entitled to, it would only be damages from the second respondent for their inaction, if available in the facts and circumstances.
The contempt proceedings stand dropped with liberty to the complainant to approach the appropriate forum seeking damages against the second respondent, if any.