(representative picture)
– Photo: Social Media
listen to the news
listen to the news
But only two days were given for filing objections from this notification. One of those days was Sunday. The court said, if the government wants, it can issue a new notification. The next hearing of the petition will be on January 4. This order has been given by the division bench of Justice MK Gupta and Justice Jayant Banerjee on the petition of Darshan Singh.
The petitioner says that seven days should be given to object to the ward delimitation under the law. Not many people could object to giving two days. It was said on behalf of the government that earlier notification was issued on 14 September 22. Seven days time was given for objection, there was some flaw in it. Therefore this notification has been issued again.
The Court did not accept this argument, saying that the first notification had 60 wards, while the notification in question included only 55 wards, which did not meet the requirement of the law. The court has stayed the notification of 5 November 22 and has also banned any action based on it.
Detailed
The Allahabad High Court has sought response from the state government while staying the notification for delimitation of wards issued on November 5, 2020 regarding the Ghaziabad Municipal Corporation elections. The court said, under Section 11B (2) of the UP Municipal Act, minimum seven days time should be given for filing objection in the notification of delimitation.
But only two days were given for filing objections from this notification. One of those days was Sunday. The court said, if the government wants, it can issue a new notification. The next hearing of the petition will be on January 4. This order has been given by a division bench of Justice MK Gupta and Justice Jayant Banerjee on the petition of Darshan Singh.
The petitioner says that seven days should be given to object to the ward delimitation under the law. Not many people could object to giving two days. It was said on behalf of the government that earlier notification was issued on 14 September 22. Seven days time was given for objection, there was some flaw in it. Therefore this notification has been issued again.
The Court did not accept this argument, saying that the first notification had 60 wards, while the notification in question included only 55 wards, which did not meet the requirement of the law. The court has stayed the notification of 5 November 22 and has also banned any action based on it.