The judiciary of Madhubani is prone to follow procedures contrary to law, an election petition 09/2016 filed 5 years ago still pending and court is vacant. Crux of issue was the mukhiya witheld criminal history from nomination papers.
On 24 th June 2019 the same person was pronounced guilty of witholding criminal history from nomination papers by tribunal of state election commission Patna.
In November 2019 the same person contracted PACS election and hence a fresh election suit was filed before the 1 st munsif bearing election petition 1/2020.
Court being vacant incharge court refused to entertain the matter. Under order 24 matter was brought to the district court which directed that urgent matters can be brought to the incharge munsif.
An application was submitted to the incharge court for hearing the matter which can be seen on the link
https://we.tl/t-ErPW8kjx0d
The urgency explained verbatim is
"Violation of article 21 of the Constitution as the liberty of democratic governance of 3255 voters have been violated and hence is an urgent matter the 44th amendment to the constitution has made it absolute that constitutional right cannot be taken away as would lead to judicial suspension of article 21 depriving constitutional guarantees does is an urgent matter of extreme urgency.
The incharge Court has orally refused to entertain the matter and has stated what is the urgency there is no urgency is what so far is the opinion of the incharge Court the order/ order sheet still to be pronounced/updated,
so I request the following
1 the rulebook where power of incharge Court is defined
2 is the application submitted correct is the urgency explained correct ,
3 is it true that article 21 gaurantee right to democratic governance to the public, or is it to be read with additional article and if not then which article gaurantee's the same
3if the incharge Court refuses to still admit the petition then what should I do next should I move the district court under what provision
thank you so much
