¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1883
∑˝§◊Ê¢∑§ xÆ ]
⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ‡ÊÈ∑˝§flÊ⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}óüÊÊfláÊ z, ‡Ê∑§ v~yÆ
÷ʪ 1
⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê
‚Ê◊Êãÿ ¬˝‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ Áfl÷ʪ
◊¢òÊÊ‹ÿ, ◊„UÊŸŒË ÷flŸ, ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U
ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ wx ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ∞»§ z-vy/wÆv|/v (∞∑§).ó⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜ÔmÊ⁄UÊ ◊ÊŸŸËÿ ãÿÊÿ◊ÍÁø Shri Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan ◊ÈÅÿ
ãÿÊÿÊÁœ¬ÁÃ, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ©Uëø ãÿÊÿÊ‹ÿ Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U ∑§Ê ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ Æ|-Æz-wÆv} ‚ wx-Æz-wÆv} (v| ÁŒŸ) ∑§Ê ¬Íáʸ flß ÷ûÊÊ¥ ‚Á„Uà ‹ÉÊÈ∑ΧÃ
•fl∑§Ê‡Ê ∑§Ê ‹Ê÷ ‹Ÿ ∑§Ë SflË∑ΧÁà ¬˝ŒÊŸ ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
߸Á◊‹ ‹∑§«∏UÊ, Áfl‡Ê· ‚Áøfl.
‚¢øÊ‹∑§, ◊Ⱥ˝áÊ ÃÕÊ ‹πŸ ‚Ê◊ª˝Ë, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U mÊ⁄UÊ ‡ÊÊ‚∑§Ëÿ ˇÊòÊËÿ ◊Ⱥ˝áÊÊ‹ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡ŸÊ¢ŒªÊ¢fl ‚ ◊ÈÁº˝Ã ÃÕÊ ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡ÊÃówÆv}.
¬¢¡ËÿŸ ∑˝§◊Ê¢∑§
“¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U/ŒÈª¸/Æ~/wÆvx-wÆvz.”
“Á’¡Ÿ‚ ¬ÊS≈U ∑§ •ãê¸Ã «UÊ∑§
‡ÊÈÀ∑§ ∑§ ŸªŒ ÷ȪÃÊŸ (Á’ŸÊ «UÊ∑§
Á≈U∑§≈U) ∑§ ¬˝·áÊ „UÃÈ •ŸÈ◊Ã. ∑˝§◊Ê¢∑§
¡Ë. w-ww-¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ª¡≈U/x} Á‚.
‚. Á÷‹Ê߸, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ xÆ-z-wÆÆv.”
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ
¬˝ÊÁœ∑§Ê⁄U ‚ ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡ÊÃ
Áfl·ÿó‚ÍøË
÷ʪ v.ó(v) ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê, (w) Áfl÷ʪ ¬˝◊ÈπÊ¥ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê,
(x) ©Uëø ãÿÊÿÊ‹ÿ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê •ÊÒ⁄U •Áœ‚ÍøŸÊ∞¢, (y)
⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§ ‚¢∑§À¬, (z) ÷Ê⁄Uà ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê •ÊÒ⁄U
•Áœ‚ÍøŸÊ∞¢, ({) ÁŸflʸøŸ •Êÿʪ, ÷Ê⁄Uà ∑§Ë •Áœ‚ÍøŸÊ∞¢,
(|) ‹Ê∑§-÷Ê·Ê ¬Á⁄UÁ‡ÊCÔU.
÷ʪ w.óSÕÊŸËÿ ÁŸ∑§Êÿ ∑§Ë •Áœ‚ÍøŸÊ∞¢.
÷ʪ x.ó(v) ÁflôÊʬŸ •ÊÒ⁄U ÁflÁflœ ‚ÍøŸÊ∞¢, (w) ‚Ê¢ÁÅÿ∑§Ëÿ
‚ÍøŸÊ∞¢.
÷ʪ y.ó(∑§) (v) ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U Áflœÿ∑§, (w) ¬˝fl⁄U ‚Á◊Áà ∑§
¬˝ÁÃflŒŸ, (x) ‚¢‚Œ ◊¥ ¬È⁄U—SÕÊÁ¬Ã Áflœÿ∑§, (π) (v)
•äÿÊŒ‡Ê, (w) ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U •ÁœÁŸÿ◊, (x) ‚¢‚Œ˜Ô ∑§
•ÁœÁŸÿ◊, (ª) (v) ¬˝ÊM§¬ ÁŸÿ◊, (w) •¢ÁÃ◊ ÁŸÿ◊.
v}}x
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1884
•ÊflÊ‚ ∞fl¥ ¬ÿʸfl⁄UáÊ Áfl÷ʪ
◊¢òÊÊ‹ÿ, ◊„UÊŸŒË ÷flŸ, ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U
ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
‡ÊÈÁhU¬òÊ
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ∞»§ |-vw/wÆv}/xw.óßU‚ Áfl÷ʪ ∑§Ë ‚◊‚¥Åÿ∑§ •ÁäÊ‚ÍøŸÊ ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w}-z-wÆv} mÊ⁄UÊ ’‹ÊҌʒʡÊ⁄U Á¡‹ ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
⁄UflÊŸU ÁŸfl‡Ê ˇÊòÊ ∑§Ê ª∆UŸ ∑§⁄Uà „ÈU∞ ©U‚∑§Ë ‚Ë◊Ê∞¥ ÁŸäÊʸÁ⁄Uà ∑§⁄UŸ ‚¥’¥äÊË „ÒU, ∑§ ŒÁˇÊáÊË ‚Ë◊Ê ◊¥ ª˝Ê◊ “÷º˝Ê¬Ê‹U” ∑§ SÕÊŸ ¬⁄U ª˝Ê◊ “÷º˝Ê¬Ê‹ËU”
¬…∏UÊ ¡Êÿ.
ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ v{ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
‡ÊÈÁhU¬òÊ
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ∞»§ |-vÆ/wÆv}/xw.óßU‚ Áfl÷ʪ ∑§Ë ‚◊‚¥Åÿ∑§ •ÁäÊ‚ÍøŸÊ ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w}-z-wÆv} mÊ⁄UÊ ’‹ÊҌʒʡÊ⁄U Á¡‹ ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
π¬⁄UÊ«UË„U ÁŸfl‡Ê ˇÊòÊ ∑§Ê ª∆UŸ ∑§⁄Uà „ÈU∞ ©U‚∑§Ë ‚Ë◊Ê∞¥ ÁŸäÊʸÁ⁄Uà ∑§⁄UŸ ‚¥’¥äÊË „ÒU, ∑§ ŒÁˇÊáÊË ‚Ë◊Ê ◊¥ ª˝Ê◊ “Áπ¬⁄UÊ«UË„U” ∑§ SÕÊŸ ¬⁄U ª˝Ê◊
“π¬⁄UÊ«UË„U” ¬…∏UÊ ¡Êÿ.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
⁄‘U¡ËŸÊ ≈UÊå¬Ê, •¬⁄U-‚Áøfl.
LAW AND LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6917/2228/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Nilesh Jagdalla S/o Shri Makar Dhawaj Jagdalla
(Category-S.C. Merit No. 13) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-920-
40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service Com-
mission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his affidavit,
considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-initio in
case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated, untrue,
concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning any
reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of this
appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6919/2508/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Vaibhav Ghritlahre S/o Shri Jagat Ram Ghritlahre
(Category-S.C. Merit No. 14) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-920-
40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1885
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6921/2291/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Prateek Tembhurkar S/o Shri Puran Nath Tembhurkar
(Category-Unreserved Merit No. 08) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-
920-40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6923/2211/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Ku. Ankita Tigga D/o Shri Anand Prakash Tigga
[Category-S. T. (F-E) Merit No. 25] on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-
920-40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date she assumes charge of her office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during her selection process as well as the information given by appointee in her
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event her service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by her on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6925/2210/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Vivek Kerketta S/o Shri Manshuk Kerketta
(Category-S. T. Merit No. 16) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-920-
40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1886
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6927/2261/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Ku. Ranju Vaishnav D/o Shri Lakhan Das Vaishnav
[Category-Unreserved (F) Merit No. 04] on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-
33,090-920-40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule
3 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on
probation for a period of two years or till further order, from the date she assumes charge of her office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during her selection process as well as the information given by appointee in her
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event her service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by her on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6929/2512/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Ku. Yogita Jangade D/o Late Shri Ganga Ram Jangade
[Category-S.C. (F) Merit No. 20] on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-
920-40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date she assumes charge of her office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during her selection process as well as the information given by appointee in her
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event her service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by her on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6931/2294/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Kranti Kumar Singh S/o Shri Jagadev Prasad
(Category-S.T. Merit No. 24] on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-920-
40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1887
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6933/2209/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Prashant Kumar Dewangan S/o Shri Ram Kumar
Dewangan (Category-OBC Merit No. 11) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-
33,090-920-40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule
3 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on
probation for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6935/2201/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Manoj Kumar Kushwaha S/o Shri Ramswarup
Kushwaha (Category-OBC Merit No. 12) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-
33,090-920-40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule
3 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on
probation for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6937/2333/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Rajat Kumar Nirala S/o Shri G. R. Nirala
(Category-S.T. Merit No. 21) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-920-
40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1888
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6939/2212/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Ku. Kiran Panna D/o Shri Pascal Panna [Category-
S.T. (F) Merit No. 18] on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-920-40,450-
1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the Chhattisgarh
Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation for a period
of two years or till further order, from the date she assumes charge of her office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during her selection process as well as the information given by appointee in her
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event her service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by her on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6941/2329/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Smt. Kalpana Bhagat W/o Shri Amit Kumar Tirkey
[Category-Unreserved (F) Merit No. 01] on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-
33,090-920-40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule
3 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on
probation for a period of two years or till further order, from the date she assumes charge of her office.
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during her selection process as well as the information given by appointee in her
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event her service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by her on the strength of
this appointment order.
Raipur, the 12th July 2018
No. 6943/2279/XXI-B/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 234 of the Constitution of
India read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 2006 the State Government, hereby appoints Shri Ashish Bhagat S/o Shri Amarjeet Bhagat
(Category-S.T. Merit No. 19) on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) in the Pay Scale of 27,700-770-33,090-920-
40,450-1,080-44,770 (Corresponding 7th C.P.C. Pay Matrix-10) under clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 of the
Chhattisgarh Lower Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006, temporarily on probation
for a period of two years or till further order, from the date he assumes charge of his office.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1889
This order is being issued on the basis of the documents and information furnished to Public Service
Commission by the appointee during his selection process as well as the information given by appointee in his
affidavit, considering them to be correct, bonafide and true. This appointment order shall be deemed to be void ab-
initio in case any information so furnished by the appointee is subsequently found to be concealed, false, fabricated,
untrue, concocted of misleading and in such event his service shall be terminated without any enquiry or assigning
any reason or cause and also no right or claim shall accrue on account of services rendered by him on the strength of
this appointment order.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Chhattisgarh,
RAVISHANKAR SHARMA, Principal Secretary,
¬¥øÊÿà ∞fl¥ ª˝Ê◊ËáÊ Áfl∑§Ê‚ Áfl÷ʪ
◊¢òÊÊ‹ÿ, ◊„UÊŸŒË ÷flŸ, ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U
ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w{ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/¬¥./¬¥ª˝ÊÁflÁfl/ww/wÆv}/vww|.ó¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥.) ‚¥flª¸ (‚flÊ ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ ‡Êø) ÁŸÿ◊, wÆv} ∑§Ê ÁŸêŸÁ‹ÁπÃ
¬˝ÊM§¬, Á¡‚ ⁄UÊíÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ¬¥øÊÿà ⁄UÊ¡ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, v~~x (∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ v ‚Ÿ˜ v~~y) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ ~z ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ‚„U¬Á∆Uà äÊÊ⁄UÊ
|Æ ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ÃÕÊ äÊÊ⁄UÊ zx ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ŒûÊ ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ◊¥ ‹Êà „ÈU∞ ’ŸÊŸÊ ¬˝SÃÊÁflà ∑§⁄UÃË „ÒU, ©UÄà •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊
∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ ~z ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (x) mÊ⁄UÊ •¬ÁˇÊà Á∑§ÿ ªÿ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U, ©UŸ ‚◊Sà √ÿÁÄÃÿÊ¥, Á¡Ÿ∑§ Á∑§ ©U‚‚ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà „UÊŸ ∑§Ë ‚¥÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU, ∑§Ë
¡ÊŸ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§ Á‹ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡Êà Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU ÃÕÊ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ‚ÍÁøà Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ©UÄà ¬˝ÊM§¬ ¬⁄U ßU‚ •ÁäÊ‚ÍøŸÊ ∑§ ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ ◊¥
¬˝∑§Ê‡ÊŸ ∑§Ë ÃÊ⁄UËπ ‚ ¬¥º˝„U ÁŒfl‚ ∑§ •fl‚ÊŸ ∑§ ¬‡øÊØ ÁfløÊ⁄U Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ.
∑§Ê߸ •Ê¬ÁûÊ ÿÊ ‚ȤÊÊfl, ¡Ê ©UÄà ¬˝ÊM§¬ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ Á∑§‚Ë √ÿÁÄà ‚ ÁflÁŸÁŒ¸CU ∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ ∑§ ¬Ífl¸, ‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ¬¥øÊÿÃ
∞fl¥ ª˝Ê◊ËáÊ Áfl∑§Ê‚ Áfl÷ʪ, (∑§ˇÊ ∑˝§. ∞‚ Æ-wy), ◊„UÊŸŒË ÷flŸ, ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿËŸ ‚◊ÿ ◊¥ ¬˝Êåà „UÊ, ¬⁄U ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U
‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ mÊ⁄UÊ ÁfløÊ⁄U Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ.
ÁŸÿ◊ ¬˝ÊM§¬
v.
‚¥ÁˇÊåà ŸÊ◊ ÃÕÊ ¬˝Ê⁄¥U÷.ó
(v)
ÿ ÁŸÿ◊ ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ (‚flÊ ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ ‡ÊÃZ) ÁŸÿ◊, wÆv} ∑§„U‹Ê∞¥ª.
(w)
ÿ ÁŸÿ◊ ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ ◊¥ ßUŸ∑§ ¬˝∑§Ê‡ÊŸ ∑§Ë ÃÊ⁄UËπ ‚ ¬˝flÎûÊ „UÊ¥ª.
w.
¬Á⁄U÷Ê·Ê∞¥.ó ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ◊¥, ¡’ Ã∑§ Á∑§ ‚¥Œ÷¸ ‚ •ãÿÕÊ •¬ÁˇÊà Ÿ „UÊ,ó
(∑§)
“•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊” ‚ •Á÷¬˝Ã „UÒ ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ¬¥øÊÿà ⁄UÊ¡ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, v~~x (∑˝§. v ‚Ÿ˜ v~~y);
(π)
Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ “ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË” ‚ •Á÷¬˝Ã „ÒU ∞‚Ê ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ¡Ê •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§
∑§ÊÚ‹◊ (z) ◊¥ ÁflÁŸÁŒ¸CU „ÒU;
(ª)
“‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ” ‚ •Á÷¬˝Ã „ÒU ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ;
(ÉÊ)
“¬¥øÊÿÔ ‚ •Á÷¬˝Ã „ÒU •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ ∑§ •äÊËŸ ªÁ∆UÃ, ÿÕÊÁSÕÁÃ, Á¡‹Ê ¬¥øÊÿÃ, ¡Ÿ¬Œ ¬¥øÊÿà ÿÊ ª˝Ê◊
¬¥øÊÿÃ;
(æ§)
“•ŸÈ‚ÍøË” ‚ •Á÷¬˝Ã „ÒU ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ◊¥ ‚ ‚¥‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË;
(ø)
“Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸” ‚ •Á÷¬˝Ã „ÒU ÿÕÊÁSÕÁÃ, Á¡‹Ê ¬¥øÊÿà ÿÊ ¡Ÿ¬Œ ¬¥øÊÿà ∑§ ÁŸÿ¥òÊáÊÊäÊËŸ
ÁfllÊ‹ÿÊ¥ ◊¥ ¬…∏UÊŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ÁŸÿÈÄà √ÿÁÄÃ;
(w)
‡ÊéŒ ÃÕÊ •Á÷√ÿÁÄÃÿÊÚ, ¡Ê ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ◊¥ ¬˝ÿÈÄà „Ò¥U, Á∑§ãÃÈ ¬Á⁄U÷ÊÁ·Ã Ÿ„UË¥ „ÒU, ∑§ fl„UË¥ •Õ¸ „UÊ¥ª, ¡Ê ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ¬¥øÊÿÃ
⁄UÊ¡ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, v~~x (∑˝§. v ‚Ÿ˜ v~~y) ◊¥ ©UŸ∑§ Á‹ÿ ‚◊ŸÈŒÁ‡Êà „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1890
x.
ÁflSÃÊ⁄U ÃÕÊ ‹ÊªÍ „UÊŸÊ.ó ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U Á‚Áfl‹ ‚flÊ (‚flÊ ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ ‡ÊÃZ) ÁŸÿ◊, v~{v ◊¥ •ãÃÁfl¸CU ¬˝ÊfläÊÊŸÊ¥ ∑§Ë √ÿʬ∑§ÃÊ ¬⁄U
¬˝ÁÃ∑ͧ‹ ¬˝÷Êfl «UÊ‹ Á’ŸÊ, ÿ ÁŸÿ◊ ‚flÊ ∑§ ¬˝àÿ∑§ ‚ŒSÿ ¬⁄U ‹ÊªÍ „UÊ¥ª.
y.
‚flÊ ∑§Ê ª∆UŸ.ó‚flÊ ◊¥ ÁŸêŸÁ‹Áπà √ÿÁÄà ‚Áê◊Á‹Ã „UÊ¥ª, •ÕʸØ —ó
(v)
fl √ÿÁÄÃ, ¡Ê ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ ¬˝Ê⁄¥U÷ ∑§ ‚◊ÿ, •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ◊¥ ÁflÁŸÁŒ¸CU ¬ŒÊ¥ ∑§Ê ◊͋× ÿÊ SÕʟʬ㟠„ÒUÁ‚ÿà ‚ äÊÊ⁄UáÊ ∑§⁄U
⁄U„U „UÊ¥;
(w)
fl √ÿÁÄÃ, ¡Ê ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ ¬˝Ê⁄¥U÷ „UÊŸ ∑§ ¬Ífl¸ ‚flÊ ◊¥ ÷Ã˸ Á∑§ÿ ªÿ „UÊ¥.
z.
flªË¸∑§⁄UáÊ ÃÕÊ flß◊ÊŸ.ó ‚flÊ ∑§Ê flªË¸∑§⁄UáÊ ÃÕÊ ©U‚‚ ‚¥‹ÇŸ flß◊ÊŸ, •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ◊¥ •¥ÃÁfl¸CU ¬˝ÊfläÊÊŸÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U „UÊ¥ª.
{.
‚¥ÁflÁ‹ÿŸ.ó ¡Ò‚ „UË Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË •Ê∆U fl·¸ ∑§Ë ‚flÊ ¬Íáʸ ∑§⁄Uà „Ò¥U, flÒ‚ „UË ©UŸ∑§Ê S∑ͧ‹ Á‡ÊˇÊÊ Áfl÷ʪ
∑§ •äÊËŸ ‡ÊÊ‚∑§Ëÿ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ ∑§ M§¬ ◊¥ ‚¥ÁflÁ‹ÿŸ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ.
|.
•ŸÈ∑¥§¬Ê ÁŸÿÈÁÄÃ.ó Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§Ë ©UŸ∑§ ‚flÊ ∑§ ŒÊÒ⁄UÊŸ ◊ÎàÿÈ „UÊ ¡ÊŸ ¬⁄U, ©UŸ∑§ ¬ÊòÊ •ÊÁüÊà ∑§Ê ‚„UÊÿ∑§ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§
(¬¥øÊÿÃ) ∑§ M§¬ ◊¥ ¬ÊòÊÃÊ ◊ÊŸŒá«U ¬Íáʸ ∑§⁄UŸ ¬⁄U, •ŸÈ∑¥§¬Ê ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ŒË ¡ÊÿªË—
¬⁄¥UÃÈ ÿ„U Á∑§ ∞‚Ë ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ∑§Ë ◊Ê¥ª ∑§⁄UŸ flÊ‹ •ÊÁüÊà mÊ⁄UÊ, ‚„UÊÿ∑§ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ∑§ ¬Œ ¬⁄U •ŸÈ∑¥§¬Ê ÁŸÿÈÁÄà „UÃÈ,
„UÊÿ⁄U ‚∑§á«U⁄UË, «UË.∞«U./’Ë.∞‹.∞«U. ∞fl¥ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑ ¬ÊòÊÃÊ ¬⁄UˡÊÊ (≈UË.߸U.≈UË.) ©UûÊËáʸ ∑§⁄UŸÊ •ÁŸflÊÿ¸ „ÒU.
}.
¬Á⁄UflˡÊÊ.ó
(v)
∞‚ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË, Á¡Ÿ∑§Ë ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ Á∑˝§ÿÊãflÿŸ ∑§ ¬Ífl¸ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§ ¬Œ ¬⁄U „ÈU߸U „ÒU •ÊÒ⁄U Á¡Ÿ∑§Ë
¬Á⁄UflˡÊÊ ∑§Ë ∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ ‚◊Êåà Ÿ„UË¥ „ÈU߸U „ÒU, ŒÊ fl·¸ ∑§Ë ∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ ∑§ Á‹ÿ ¬Á⁄UflˡÊÊ ¬⁄U ⁄U„¥Uª, Á¡‚ ¬Ê¥ø fl·¸ ∑§Ë ∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ
Ã∑§ ’…∏UÊÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ªÊ. ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ¬˝àÿ∑§ fl·¸ ∑§ •¥Ã ◊¥ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË ∑§ ∑§Êÿ¸ ∑§Ê
•Ê¥∑§‹Ÿ ∑§⁄‘UªÊ.
(w)
ŒÊ fl·¸ ∑§Ë ¬Á⁄UflˡÊÊ ∑§Ë ∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ ∑§ ¬‡øÊØ ¬¥øÊÿÃ, Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË ∑§ •Êø⁄UáÊ ∞fl¥ ©UŸ∑§ ∑§ÊÿÊZ
∑§ •ÊäÊÊ⁄U ¬⁄U, ¬Á⁄UflˡÊÊ ∑§Ë ∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ ‚◊Êåà ∑§⁄U ‚∑§ªË. Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË ∑§Ê ∑§Êÿ¸ ‚¥ÃÊ·¡Ÿ∑§
Ÿ„UË¥ ¬Êÿ ¡ÊŸ ∑§Ë ÁSÕÁà ◊¥ ¬Á⁄UflˡÊÊ ∑§Ë ∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ ∞∑§ ‚ ÃËŸ fl·¸ Ã∑§ ’…∏UÊ߸U ¡Ê ‚∑§ªË. ßU‚∑§ ¬‡øÊØ ∞‚Ë ’…∏UÊ߸U ªß¸U
∑§Ê‹ÊflÁäÊ ∑§ •¥Ã ◊¥ ©UŸ∑§ ∑§Êÿ¸ ∑§Ê •Ê¥∑§‹Ÿ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ •ÊÒ⁄U ÿÁŒ Á»§⁄U ÷Ë ©UŸ∑§ ∑§Êÿ¸ ‚¥ÃÊ·¡Ÿ∑§ Ÿ„UË¥ ¬Êÿ ¡Êà „Ò¥U,
ÃÊ ©UŸ∑§Ë ‚flÊ∞¥ ‚◊Êåà ∑§⁄U ŒË ¡Êÿ¥ªË.
~.
•ŸÈ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞fl¥ ÁŸÿ¥òÊáÊ.ó Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸, ÿÕÊÁSÕÁÃ, Á¡‹Ê ¬¥øÊÿà ÿÊ ¡Ÿ¬Œ ¬¥øÊÿà ∑§ ¬˝‡ÊÊ‚∑§Ëÿ ÁŸÿ¥òÊáÊÊäÊËŸ
„UÊ¥ª. ŒËÉʸ ‡ÊÊÁSà ∑§ Á‹∞, Á¡‹Ê ¬¥øÊÿà ÿÊ ¡Ÿ¬Œ ¬¥øÊÿà ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ ¬˝‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ‚Á◊Áà ÃÕÊ ‹ÉÊÈ ‡ÊÊÁSà ∑§ Á‹∞, ‚¥’ÁäÊà ¬¥øÊÿÃ
∑§ ◊ÈÅÿ ∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË/•ÁÃÁ⁄UÄà ◊ÈÅÿ ∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, •ŸÈ‡ÊÊ‚ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË „UÊ¥ª.
vÆ.
‚flÊ ∑§Ë ‚◊ÊÁåÃ.ó Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ) ‚¥flª¸ ∑§ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË ∑§Ë ‚flÊ∞¥, ÿÊ ÃÊ ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË mÊ⁄UÊ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË ∑§Ê; •ÕflÊ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË
mÊ⁄UÊ ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê Á‹Áπà ◊¥ ∞∑§ ◊Ê‚ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ Œ∑§⁄U; ÿÊ ∑§◊¸øÊ⁄UË mÊ⁄UÊ ∞∑§ ◊Ê‚ ∑§ flß ∑§Ê ÷ȪÃÊŸ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ ¬‡øÊØ
Á∑§‚Ë ÷Ë ‚◊ÿ ‚◊Êåà ∑§Ë ¡Ê ‚∑¥§ªË.
vv.
‚flÊ ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ ‡ÊÃZ.ó ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ‚ Á÷㟠‚flÊ ∑§Ë ‡ÊÃZ fl„UË¥ „UÊ¥ªË ¡Ê Á∑§ ÿÕÊÁSÕÁÃ, Á¡‹Ê ¬¥øÊÿà •ÕflÊ
¡Ÿ¬Œ ¬¥øÊÿà ∑§ •ãÿ ∑§◊¸øÊÁ⁄UÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ‹ÊªÍ „ÒU.
vw.
•¬Ë‹.ó ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ •äÊËŸ ¬ÊÁ⁄Uà Á∑§‚Ë •ÊŒ‡Ê ∑§ ÁflL§hU •¬Ë‹, •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U „UʪË.
vx.
ÁŸfl¸øŸ.ó ÿÁŒ ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ ÁŸfl¸øŸ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ ∑§Ê߸U ¬˝‡Ÿ ©UŒ˜÷Íà „UÊÃÊ „UÊ, ÃÊ ©U‚ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÁŸÁŒ¸CU Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ, Á¡‚ ¬⁄U
©U‚∑§Ê ÁflÁŸÁ‡øÿ •¥ÁÃ◊ „UʪÊ.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1891
vy.
Á‡ÊÁÕ‹Ë∑§⁄UáÊ.ó ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ◊¥ ŒË ªß¸U Á∑§‚Ë ’Êà ∑§Ê ÿ„U •Õ¸ Ÿ„UË¥ ‹ªÊÿÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ Á∑§ fl„U ∞‚ √ÿÁÄà ∑§ ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥, Á¡‚∑§Ê ÿ
ÁŸÿ◊ ‹ÊªÍ „UÊà „Ò¥U, ∞‚Ë ⁄UËÁà ‚ ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„UË ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ë ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§Ë ‡ÊÁÄà ∑§Ê, ¡Ê ©U‚ ©UÁøà •ÊÒ⁄U ãÿÊÿ‚¥ªÃ ¬˝ÃËà „UÊ, ‚ËÁ◊à ÿÊ
∑§◊ ∑§⁄UÃË „ÒU—
¬⁄UãÃÈ ∑§Ê߸ ◊Ê◊‹Ê ∞‚Ë ⁄UËÁà ‚ Ÿ„UË¥ ÁŸ¬≈UÊÿÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ, ¡Ê Á∑§ ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ◊¥ ©U¬’¥ÁäÊà ⁄UËÁà ∑§Ë •¬ˇÊÊ ©U‚∑§ Á‹ÿ ∑§◊
•ŸÈ∑ͧ‹ „UÊ.
vz.
ÁŸ⁄U‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U √ÿÊflÎÁûÊ.óßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ ÃàSÕÊŸË •ÊÒ⁄U ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ ¬˝Ê⁄¥U÷ „UÊŸ ∑§ ∆UË∑§ ¬Ífl¸ ¬˝flÎûÊ ‚◊Sà ÁŸÿ◊, ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§
•¥Ãª¸Ã •ÊŸ flÊ‹ Áfl·ÿÊ¥ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ ÁŸ⁄UÁ‚à Á∑§ÿ ¡Êà „Ò¥U—
¬⁄UãÃÈ ßU‚ ¬˝∑§Ê⁄U ÁŸ⁄UÁ‚à ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ •äÊËŸ Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ ∑§Ê߸U ÷Ë •ÊŒ‡Ê ÿÊ ∑§Ë ªß¸U ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„UË, ßUŸ ÁŸÿ◊Ê¥ ∑§ ÃàSÕÊŸË
©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •äÊËŸ ÁŒÿÊ ªÿÊ •ÊŒ‡Ê ÿÊ ∑§Ë ªß¸U ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„UË ‚◊¤ÊË ¡ÊÿªË.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
ÃÊ⁄UŸ ¬˝∑§Ê‡Ê Á‚ã„UÊ, ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
[ ÁŸÿ◊ w (π) ∞fl¥ z ŒÁπÿ ]
‚. ∑˝§.
Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥.) ‚¥flª¸ flß◊ÊŸ
ÁŸÿÈÁÄà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
| fl·¸ Ã∑§Ë ∑§Ë ‚flÊ •flÁäÊ
| ‚ } fl·¸ ∑§ ’Ëø ‚flÊ
flÊ‹Ê¥ ∑§Ê flß◊ÊŸ
•flÁäÊ flÊ‹Ê¥ ∑§Ê flß◊ÊŸ
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
v.
√ÿÊÅÿÊÃÊ (¬¥øÊÿÃ)
zxÆÆ-vzÆ-}xÆÆ
|ÆÆÆ-wÆÆ-xÆÆÆÆ+yzÆÆ
Á¡‹Ê ¬¥øÊÿà ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ
•äÿʬŸ ÷ûÊÊ.
¬˝‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ‚Á◊ÁÃ.
w.
Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ)
yzÆÆ-vwz-|ÆÆÆ
{ÆÆÆ-v|z-wzÆÆÆ+xzÆÆ
Á¡‹Ê ¬¥øÊÿà ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ
•äÿʬŸ ÷ûÊÊ.
¬˝‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ‚Á◊ÁÃ.
x.
‚„UÊÿ∑§ Á‡ÊˇÊ∑§ (¬¥øÊÿÃ)
x}ÆÆ-vÆÆ-z}ÆÆ
zÆÆÆ-vzÆ-wÆÆÆÆ+wzÆÆ
¡Ÿ¬Œ ¬¥øÊÿà ∑§Ë ‚Ê◊Êãÿ
•äÿʬŸ ÷ûÊÊ.
¬˝‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ‚Á◊ÁÃ.
ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w{ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/¬¥./¬¥ª˝ÊÁflÁfl/ww/wÆv}/vww}.ó÷Ê⁄Uà ∑§ ‚¥ÁfläÊÊŸ ∑§ •ŸÈë¿UŒ xy} ∑§ π¥«U (x) ∑§ •ŸÈ‚⁄UáÊ ◊¥ ßU‚ Áfl÷ʪ ∑§Ë •ÁäÊ‚ÍøŸÊ
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/¬¥./¬¥ª˝ÊÁflÁfl/ww/wÆv}/vww|, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w{-Æ|-wÆv} ∑§Ê •¥ª˝¡Ë •ŸÈflÊŒ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U ‚ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡Êà Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ
„ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
ÃÊ⁄UŸ ¬˝∑§Ê‡Ê Á‚ã„UÊ, ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
Naya Raipur, the 26 July 2018
No./P./PGVV/22/2018/1227/The following draft of the Chhattisgarh Teacher (Panchayat) Cadre (General
Conditions of Service) Rules, 2018, which the State Government proposes to make in exercise of the powers
conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 95 read with sub-section (1) of Section 70 and sub-section (1) of section 53
of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (No.1 of 1994), is hereby, published as required by sub-section
(3) of Section 95 of the said Adhiniyam, for the information of all persons likely to be affected thereby and notice is
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1892
hereby given that the said draft shall be taken into consideration after the expiry of fifteen days from the date of
publication of this notification in the Official Gazette.
Any objection or suggestions regarding the said draft received from any person, before the specified period,
in office hours by the office of the Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Department of Panchayat & Rural Devel-
opment, (Room No. S0-24), Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur shall be considered by the Government of
Chhattisgarh.
DRAFT RULES
1.
Short Title and Commencement.—
(1)
These rules may be called the Chhattisgarh Teacher [Panchayat] Cadre [General Conditions of
service] Rules, 2018.
(2)
These rules shall come into force from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
2.
Definitions.— In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires;
(a)
“Act” means the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (No. 1 of 1994);
(b)
“Appointing Authority” in respect of Teacher [Panchayat] Cadre means such authority as
specified in column (5) of Schedule;
(c)
“Government” means the Government of Chhattisgarh;
(d)
“Panchayat” means Zila Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat or Gram Panchayat, as the case
may be, constituted under the Act;
(e)
“Schedule” means a Schedule appended to these rules;
(f)
“Teacher [Panchayat] Cadre” means person appointed for teaching in schools under con-
trol of Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat, as the case may be.
(2)
The words and expressions used but not defined in these rules shall have the same meaning as
assigned to them in the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (No. 1 of 1994).
3.
Scope and application -Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in the Chhattisgarh
Civil Service (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961, these rules shall apply to every member of the
Service.
4.
Constitution of the service.— The service shall consist of the following persons, namely:—
(1)
Persons, who at the commencement of these rules are holding substantively or in officiating capac-
ity the posts specified in Schedule;
(2)
Persons, recruited to the service before the commencement of these rules.
5.
Classification and scale of pay.— The classification of the service and the scale of pay attached thereto
shall be in accordance with the provisions contained in the Schedule.
6.
Absorption.— As and when an employee of the teacher (Panchayat) cadre completes eight years of the
service, he/she will be absorbed as government teachers under the School Education Department.
7.
Compassionate Appointment.— On the death of the teacher (Panchayat) cadre during his/her services,
eligible dependent will be given compassionate appointment, as Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) on fulfilling
the eligibility criteria:
Provided that, for compassionate appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat); Higher
Secondary, D.Ed./B.EL.ED and Teacher Eligibility (TET) must have been passed by the dependent seeking
such appointment.
8.
Probation.—
(1) The employee who were appointed to the post of teacher (Panchayat) cadre before the implementation
of this rule, and whose probation period has not expired, will remain in probation for a period of
two years, which may be extended to a five years. The Appointing Authority will assess the work of
the employees of the teacher (Panchayat) cadre at the end of each year.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1893
(2)
After the probation period of two years, on the basis of conduct and work of the employee of the
Teacher (Panchayat) cadre, the Panchayat may terminate the probation period. In case the work of
the employee of the Teacher (Panchayat) cadre is not found to be satisfactory, the probation period
may be extended from one the three years. Thereafter, their work shall be assessed at the end of the
such extended period and if their works are not found to be satisfactory, then their services shall be
terminated.
9.
Discipline and Control.— The Teacher (Panchayat) cadre shall be under the administrative control of Zila
Panchayat or Janpad panchayat, as the case may be. For major punishment, the General Administrative
Committee of Zila panchayat or Janpad panchayat and for minor punishment, the Chief Executive Officer/
Additional Chief Executive Officer of concerned Panchayat shall be the disciplinary authority.
10.
Termination Of Service.— Services of the employee of the Teacher (Panchayat) cadre may be terminated
at any time by giving one month notice in writing either by the Appointing Authority to the employee; or by
employee to the Appointing Authority; or after the depositing one month salary by the employee.
11.
General Conditions of Service.— Conditions of service other than mentioned in this rules shall be the
same, as applicable to other employee of Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat, as the case may be.
12.
Appeal.— An appeal against any order passed under these rules shall be in accordance with the provisions
of the Act.
13.
Interpretation.— If any question arises relating to the interpretation of these rules, the same shall be
referred to the Government, whose decision thereon shall be final.
14.
Relaxation.—Nothing in these rules shall be construed to limit or abridge the powers of the Governor to
deal with the case of any person to whom these rules apply in such manner as may appear to him to be just
and proper:
Provided that any case shall not be dealt with in any manner less favorable to him, than those
provided in these rules.
15.
Repeal and Saving.-—All rules corresponding to these rules and in force immediately before the com-
mencement of these rules are hereby repealed in respect of matters covered by these rules:
Provided that any order made or any action taken under the rules so repealed shall be deemed to
have been made or taken under the corresponding provisions of these rules.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Chhattisgarh,
TARAN PARKASH SINHA, Deputy Secretary.
SECHEDULE
[ See rules 2 (b) and 5 ]
S. No.
Teacher (Panchayat) Pay Scale
Appointing Authority
cadre
Pay scale of service
Pay scale of service period
period up to 7 years
between 7 to 8 years
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1.
Lecturer (Panchayat)
5300-150-8300
7000-200-30000+4500
The general adminis-
Teaching Allowance
trative committee of
Zila Panchayat.
2.
Teacher (Panchayat)
4500-125-7000
6000-175-25000+3500
The general adminis-
Teaching Allowance
trative committee of
Zila Panchayat.
3.
Assistant Teacher
3800-100-5800
5000-150-20000+2500
The general adminis-
(Panchayat)
Teaching Allowance
trative committee of
Janpad Panchayat.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1894
⁄UÊ¡Sfl Áfl÷ʪ
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê ∑§Ê⁄U’Ê, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥ •Ê¬ŒÊ
¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
∑§Ê⁄U’Ê, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ x ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
¬˝ÊM§¬-∞∑§
(ÁŸÿ◊ vv ŒÁπÿ)
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/vvyvz/∑§/÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ/Æx •/}w/wÆv|-v}.ó÷ÍÁ◊-•¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U ÃÕÊ ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ
∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ y ‚„U¬Á∆Uà ÁŸÿ◊ | ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŸËø •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê •¡¸Ÿ ‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ „UÃÈ ⁄UÊíÿ
‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U mÊ⁄UÊ •Ê‡ÊÁÿà „ÒU, •ÕʸØ —ó
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
ª˝Ê◊/Ÿª⁄U
ˇÊòÊ»§‹
‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§Ê Áflfl⁄UáÊ
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
∑§Ê⁄U’Ê
∑§⁄UËÊ
π⁄U„U⁄U∑ȧ«∏Ê
Æ.Æz| „U.
Á◊ŸË◊ÊÃÊ („U‚Œfl) ’Ê¥ªÊ ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ∑§ π⁄U„U⁄U∑ȧ«∏Ê
©U¬ ÄU. ’⁄U¬Ê‹Ë
◊Êߟ⁄U Ÿ„U⁄U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
©U¬⁄UÊÄà ©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ •¡¸Ÿ „UÃÈ ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ‚◊ÊÉÊÊà ÁŸäÊʸ⁄UáÊ ∑§ •äÿÿŸ „UÃÈ ¡Ÿ ‚ÈŸflÊ߸U ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w|-Æ|-wÆv} ∑§Ê ‚◊ÿ
vw.ÆÆ ’¡ ‚ SÕÊŸ ª˝Ê◊ π⁄U„U⁄U∑ȧ«∏Ê ÁŸÿà ∑§Ë ªß¸U „ÒU. ¬˝SÃÊÁflà ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ ∑§Ê •ãÿ Áflfl⁄UáÊ ÁŸêŸÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U „ÒU —ó
v.
‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§Ê ‚¥ÁˇÊåà Áflfl⁄UáÊ
ó
Á◊ŸË◊ÊÃÊ („U‚Œfl) ’Ê¥ªÊ ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ∑§ π⁄U„U⁄U∑ȧ«∏Ê
◊ÊßUŸ⁄U Ÿ„U⁄U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
w.
¬˝àÿˇÊ M§¬ ‚ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà ¬Á⁄UflÊ⁄UÊ¥ ∑§Ë ‚¥ÅÿÊ
ó
Æv
x.
•¬˝àÿˇÊ M§¬ ‚ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà ¬Á⁄UflÊ⁄UÊ¥ ∑§Ë ‚¥ÅÿÊ
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
y.
¬˝÷ÊÁflà ˇÊòÊ ◊¥ ÁŸ¡Ë ◊∑§ÊŸÊ¥ ÃÕÊ •ãÿ ¬Á⁄U‚ê¬ÁûÊÿÊ¥ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊ÊÁŸÃ ‚¥ÅÿÊ.
z.
¬˝÷ÊÁflà ˇÊòÊ ◊¥ ‡ÊÊ‚∑§Ëÿ ◊∑§ÊŸÊ¥ ÃÕÊ •ãÿ
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
¬Á⁄U‚ê¬ÁûÊÿÊ¥ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊ÊÁŸÃ ‚¥ÅÿÊ.
{.
ÄÿÊ ¬˝SÃÊÁflà •¡¸Ÿ ãÿÍŸÃ◊ „ÒU ?
ó
„UÊ¥
|.
ÄÿÊ ‚¥÷fl Áfl∑§À¬Ê¥ •ÊÒ⁄U ßU‚∑§Ë ‚ÊäÿÃÊ ¬⁄U ÁfløÊ⁄U
ó
„UÊ¥
∑§⁄U Á‹ÿÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU ?
}.
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ∑§Ë ∑ȧ‹ ‹ÊªÃ
ó
y~w.xv ‹Êπ
~.
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ‚ „UÊŸ flÊ‹Ê ‹Ê÷
ó
Á‚¥øÊ߸U „UÃÈ
vÆ.
¬˝SÃÊÁflà ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ‚◊ÊÉÊÊà ∑§Ë ¬˝ÁìÍÁø ∑§ Á‹ÿ
ó
¬˝SÃÊÁflà ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ‚◊ÊÉÊÊà ∑§Ë ¬˝ÁìÍÁø ∑§ Á‹∞
©U¬Êÿ ÃÕ ©U‚ ¬⁄U „UÊŸ flÊ‹Ê ‚¥÷ÊÁflà √ÿÿ.
‚¥÷ÊÁflà ©U¬Êÿ Á∑§ÿ ¡Ê ⁄U„U „Ò¥U. ßU‚ „UÃÈ ∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ
•Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, „U‚Œfl Ÿ„U⁄U ¡‹ ¬˝’¥äÊ ‚¥÷ʪ ¡Ê¥¡ªË⁄U mÊ⁄UÊ
⁄UÊÁ‡Ê z.ÆÆ ‹Êπ ∑§Ê ÷ȪÃÊŸ ø∑§ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ w{v~|z
ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vz-Æ{-wÆv} ∑§ ◊Êäÿ◊ ‚ ¡◊Ê Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU.
vvU
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà „UÊŸ flÊ‹ •ãÿ ÉÊ≈U∑§
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
©U¬⁄UÊÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ Á∑§‚Ë √ÿÁÄÃ/‚¥SÕÊ ÿÊ •ãÿ Á∑§‚Ë √ÿÁÄà ∑§Ê ∑§Ê߸U ¡ÊŸ∑§Ê⁄UË/‚ȤÊÊfl ŒŸÊ „UÊ, ÃÊ ÁflÁ„Uà ÁÃÁÕ/‚◊ÿ
∞fl¥ SÕÊŸ ¬⁄U ŒË ¡Ê ‚∑§ªË.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
◊Ê. ∑Ò§‚⁄U •éŒÈ‹ „U∑§, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1895
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥
•Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wx ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
¬˝ÊM§¬-∞∑§
(ÁŸÿ◊ vv ŒÁπÿ)
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/wz|/÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ/•.Áfl.•./wÆv}.ó÷ÍÁ◊-•¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U ÃÕÊ ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ y ‚„U¬Á∆Uà ÁŸÿ◊ | ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŸËø •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê •¡¸Ÿ ‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ „UÃÈ ⁄UÊíÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U mÊ⁄UÊ
•Ê‡ÊÁÿà „ÒU, •ÕʸØ —ó
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
ª˝Ê◊/Ÿª⁄U
ˇÊòÊ»§‹
‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§Ê Áflfl⁄UáÊ
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
∑§Ê≈UÊU
ø¥ªÊ⁄UË
Æ.Æ{Æ
⁄U߬È⁄U-∑§Ê≈UÊ-‹Ê⁄U◊Ë ◊ʪ¸ ∑§Ê ©UãŸÿŸ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸÁŸ¸◊ÊáÊ
∑§Êÿ¸ „UÃÈ.
©U¬⁄UÊÄà ©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ •¡¸Ÿ „UÃÈ ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ‚◊ÊÉÊÊà ÁŸäÊʸ⁄UáÊ ∑§ •äÿÿŸ „UÃÈ ¡Ÿ ‚ÈŸflÊ߸U (ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§) xÆ-Æ|-wÆv} ∑§Ê
(‚◊ÿ) vv.ÆÆ ’¡ (SÕÊŸ) ª˝Ê◊ ¬¥øÊÿà ÷flŸ, ø¥ªÊ⁄UË ¬⁄U ÁŸÿà ∑§Ë ªß¸U „ÒU. ¬˝SÃÊÁflà ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ ∑§Ê •ãÿ Áflfl⁄UáÊ ÁŸêŸÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U „ÒU —ó
(∞∑§)
‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§Ê ‚¥ÁˇÊåà Áflfl⁄UáÊ
ó
⁄U߬È⁄U-∑§Ê≈UÊ-‹Ê⁄U◊Ë ◊ʪ¸ ∑§Ê ©UãŸÿŸ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸÁŸ¸◊ÊáÊ.
(ŒÊ)
¬˝àÿˇÊ M§¬ ‚ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà ¬Á⁄UflÊ⁄UÊ¥ ∑§Ë ‚¥ÅÿÊ
ó
Æw
(ÃËŸ)
•¬˝àÿˇÊ M§¬ ‚ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà ¬Á⁄UflÊ⁄UÊ¥ ∑§Ë ‚¥ÅÿÊ
ó
(øÊ⁄U)
¬˝÷ÊÁflà ˇÊòÊ ◊¥ ÁŸ¡Ë ◊∑§ÊŸÊ¥ ÃÕÊ •ãÿ ¬Á⁄U‚ê¬ÁûÊÿÊ¥ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊ÊÁŸÃ ‚¥ÅÿÊ.
(¬Ê¥ø)
¬˝÷ÊÁflà ˇÊòÊ ◊¥ ‡ÊÊ‚∑§Ëÿ ◊∑§ÊŸÊ¥ ÃÕÊ •ãÿ
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
¬Á⁄U‚ê¬ÁûÊÿÊ¥ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊ÊÁŸÃ ‚¥ÅÿÊ.
(¿U—)
ÄÿÊ ¬˝SÃÊÁflà •¡¸Ÿ ãÿÍŸÃ◊ „ÒU ?
ó
„UÊ¥
(‚ÊÃ)
ÄÿÊ ‚¥÷fl Áfl∑§À¬Ê¥ •ÊÒ⁄U ßU‚∑§Ë ‚ÊäÿÃÊ ¬⁄U ÁfløÊ⁄U
ó
„UÊ¥-©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ¬⁄U ◊ʪ¸ ∑§Ê ©UãŸÿŸ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸÁŸ¸◊ÊáÊ
∑§⁄U Á‹ÿÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU ?
∑§Êÿ¸ „UÃÈ ¬˝SÃÊÁflà „ÒU.
(•Ê∆U)
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ∑§Ë ∑ȧ‹ ‹ÊªÃ
ó
vw}.{~ ∑§⁄UÊ«∏
(ŸÊÒ)
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ‚ „UÊŸ flÊ‹Ê ‹Ê÷
ó
(Œ‚)
¬˝SÃÊÁflà ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ‚◊ÊÉÊÊà ∑§Ë ¬˝ÁìÍÁø ∑§ Á‹ÿ
ó
©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U ÃÕÊ ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊-
©U¬Êÿ ÃÕ ©U‚ ¬⁄U „UÊŸ flÊ‹Ê ‚¥÷ÊÁflà √ÿÿ.
wÆvx mÊ⁄UÊ Œ‡ÊʸÿË ªß¸U ÃÕÊ ‚◊ÿ-‚◊ÿ ¬⁄ U ¿U.ª.
‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ mÊ⁄UÊ ’ÃÊÿÊ ªÿÊU ©U¬Êÿ ∑§Ê •ŸÈ¬Ê‹Ÿ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊflªÊ
ÃÕÊ ‚¥÷ÊÁflà √ÿÿ L§. ¬Ê¥ø ‹Êπ ÿÊ flÊSÃÁfl∑§ √ÿÿ ¡Ê
÷Ë •ÁäÊ∑§ „UÊ.
(ÇÿÊ⁄U„U) ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà „UÊŸ flÊ‹ •ãÿ ÉÊ≈U∑§
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
©U¬⁄UÊÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ Á∑§‚Ë √ÿÁÄÃ/‚¥SÕÊ ÿÊ •ãÿ Á∑§‚Ë √ÿÁÄà ∑§Ê ∑§Ê߸U ¡ÊŸ∑§Ê⁄UË/‚ȤÊÊfl ŒŸÊ „UÊ, ÃÊ ÁflÁ„Uà ÁÃÁÕ/‚◊ÿ
∞fl¥ SÕÊŸ ¬⁄U ŒË ¡Ê ‚∑§ªË.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1896
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wx ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
¬˝ÊM§¬-∞∑§
(ÁŸÿ◊ vv ŒÁπÿ)
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/wz}/÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ/•.Áfl.•./wÆv}.ó÷ÍÁ◊-•¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U ÃÕÊ ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ y ‚„U¬Á∆Uà ÁŸÿ◊ | ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŸËø •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê •¡¸Ÿ ‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ „UÃÈ ⁄UÊíÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U mÊ⁄UÊ
•Ê‡ÊÁÿà „ÒU, •ÕʸØ —ó
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
ª˝Ê◊/Ÿª⁄U
ˇÊòÊ»§‹
‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§Ê Áflfl⁄UáÊ
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
∑§Ê≈UÊU
∑§Ê≈UÊ
v.}Æ~
⁄U߬È⁄U-∑§Ê≈UÊ-‹Ê⁄U◊Ë ◊ʪ¸ ∑§Ê ©UãŸÿŸ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸÁŸ¸◊ÊáÊ
∑§Êÿ¸ „UÃÈ.
©U¬⁄UÊÄà ©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ •¡¸Ÿ „UÃÈ ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ‚◊ÊÉÊÊà ÁŸäÊʸ⁄UáÊ ∑§ •äÿÿŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¡Ÿ ‚ÈŸflÊ߸U (ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§) }-}-wÆv} ∑§Ê
(‚◊ÿ) vv.ÆÆ ’¡ (SÕÊŸ) ◊á«UË ¬˝Ê¥ªáÊ ∑§Ê≈UÊ ¬⁄U ÁŸÿà ∑§Ë ªß¸U „ÒU. ¬˝SÃÊÁflà ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ ∑§Ê •ãÿ Áflfl⁄UáÊ ÁŸêŸÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U „ÒU —ó
(∞∑§)
‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§Ê ‚¥ÁˇÊåà Áflfl⁄UáÊ
ó
⁄U߬È⁄U-∑§Ê≈UÊ-‹Ê⁄U◊Ë ◊ʪ¸ ∑§Ê ©UãŸÿŸ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸÁŸ¸◊ÊáÊ.
(ŒÊ)
¬˝àÿˇÊ M§¬ ‚ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà ¬Á⁄UflÊ⁄UÊ¥ ∑§Ë ‚¥ÅÿÊ
ó
vy
(ÃËŸ)
•¬˝àÿˇÊ M§¬ ‚ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà ¬Á⁄UflÊ⁄UÊ¥ ∑§Ë ‚¥ÅÿÊ
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
(øÊ⁄U)
¬˝÷ÊÁflà ˇÊòÊ ◊¥ ÁŸ¡Ë ◊∑§ÊŸÊ¥ ÃÕÊ •ãÿ ¬Á⁄U‚ê¬ÁûÊÿÊ¥ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊ÊÁŸÃ ‚¥ÅÿÊ.
(¬Ê¥ø)
¬˝÷ÊÁflà ˇÊòÊ ◊¥ ‡ÊÊ‚∑§Ëÿ ◊∑§ÊŸÊ¥ ÃÕÊ •ãÿ
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
¬Á⁄U‚ê¬ÁûÊÿÊ¥ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊ÊÁŸÃ ‚¥ÅÿÊ.
(¿U—)
ÄÿÊ ¬˝SÃÊÁflà •¡¸Ÿ ãÿÍŸÃ◊ „ÒU ?
ó
„UÊ¥
(‚ÊÃ)
ÄÿÊ ‚¥÷fl Áfl∑§À¬Ê¥ •ÊÒ⁄U ßU‚∑§Ë ‚ÊäÿÃÊ ¬⁄U ÁfløÊ⁄U
ó
„UÊ¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ÷ÍÁ◊ ¬⁄U ◊ʪ¸ ∑§Ê ©UãŸÿŸ ∞fl¥ ¬ÈŸÁŸ¸◊ÊáÊ
∑§⁄U Á‹ÿÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU ?
∑§Êÿ¸ „UÃÈ ¬˝SÃÊÁflà „ÒU.
(•Ê∆U)
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ∑§Ë ∑ȧ‹ ‹ÊªÃ
ó
vw}.{~ ∑§⁄UÊ«∏
(ŸÊÒ)
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ‚ „UÊŸ flÊ‹Ê ‹Ê÷
ó
(Œ‚)
¬˝SÃÊÁflà ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ‚◊ÊÉÊÊà ∑§Ë ¬˝ÁìÍÁø ∑§ Á‹ÿ
ó
©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U ÃÕÊ ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊-
©U¬Êÿ ÃÕ ©U‚ ¬⁄U „UÊŸ flÊ‹Ê ‚¥÷ÊÁflà √ÿÿ.
wÆvx mÊ⁄UÊ Œ‡ÊʸÿË ªß¸U ÃÕÊ ‚◊ÿ-‚◊ÿ ¬⁄ U ¿U.ª.
‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ mÊ⁄UÊ ’ÃÊÿÊ ªÿÊU ©U¬Êÿ ∑§Ê •ŸÈ¬Ê‹Ÿ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊflªÊ
ÃÕÊ ‚¥÷ÊÁflà √ÿÿ L§. ¬Ê¥ø ‹Êπ ÿÊ flÊSÃÁfl∑§ √ÿÿ ¡Ê
÷Ë •ÁäÊ∑§ „UÊ.
(ÇÿÊ⁄U„U) ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝÷ÊÁflà „UÊŸ flÊ‹ •ãÿ ÉÊ≈U∑§
ó
ÁŸ⁄¥U∑§
©U¬⁄UÊÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ Á∑§‚Ë √ÿÁÄÃ/‚¥SÕÊ ÿÊ •ãÿ Á∑§‚Ë √ÿÁÄà ∑§Ê ∑§Ê߸U ¡ÊŸ∑§Ê⁄UË/‚ȤÊÊfl ŒŸÊ „UÊ, ÃÊ ÁflÁ„Uà ÁÃÁÕ/‚◊ÿ
∞fl¥ SÕÊŸ ¬⁄U ŒË ¡Ê ‚∑§ªË.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
¬Ë. ŒÿÊŸ¥Œ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1897
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê ’◊Ã⁄UÊ,U ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥
•Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
’◊Ã⁄UÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/Æv/•-}w/wÆv{-v|.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸÃ
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ
„ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË
¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
’◊Ã⁄UÊ
’⁄U‹ÊU
‹¥¡flÊ⁄UÊ
Æ.Æ{~
•ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, (⁄UÊ.)
‹¥¡flÊ⁄UÊ - ÃÊ⁄UÊ‹Ë◊ -
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. v{
∞fl¥ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ’⁄U‹Ê
’⁄U‹Ê ◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
(¿U.ª.).
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ’⁄U‹Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
’◊Ã⁄UÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/Æz/•-}w/wÆv{-v|.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸÃ
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ
„ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË
¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
’◊Ã⁄UÊ
’⁄U‹ÊU
πê„UÁ⁄UÿÊ
Æ.Æz~
•ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, (⁄UÊ.)
‚Ê…∏U -⁄‘Ufl - Œfl⁄U’Ë¡Ê
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. Æx
∞fl¥ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ’⁄U‹Ê
◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
(¿U.ª.).
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ’⁄U‹Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1898
’◊Ã⁄UÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/Æ{/•-}w/wÆv{-v|.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸÃ
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ
„ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË
¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
’◊Ã⁄UÊ
’⁄U‹ÊU
Œfl⁄U’Ë¡Ê
Æ.xzy
•ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, (⁄UÊ.)
‚Ê…∏U -⁄‘Ufl - Œfl⁄U’Ë¡Ê
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. Æv
∞fl¥ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ’⁄U‹Ê
◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
(¿U.ª.).
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ’⁄U‹Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
’◊Ã⁄UÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/Æ|/•-}w/wÆv{-v|.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸÃ
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ
„ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË
¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
’◊Ã⁄UÊ
’⁄U‹ÊU
⁄‘Ufl
Æ.Æ}|
•ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, (⁄UÊ.)
‚Ê…∏U -⁄‘Ufl - Œfl⁄U’Ë¡Ê
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. Æ~
∞fl¥ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ’⁄U‹Ê
◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
(¿U.ª.).
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ’⁄U‹Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1899
’◊Ã⁄UÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/Æ}/•-}w/wÆv{-v|.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸÃ
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ
„ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË
¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
’◊Ã⁄UÊ
’⁄U‹ÊU
Á‚⁄U‚Ê
Æ.x}w
•ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, (⁄UÊ.)
‚Ê…∏U -⁄‘Ufl - Œfl⁄U’Ë¡Ê
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. vÆ
∞fl¥ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ’⁄U‹Ê
◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
(¿U.ª.).
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ’⁄U‹Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
’◊Ã⁄UÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/vÆ/•-}w/wÆv{-v|.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸÃ
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ
„ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË
¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
’◊Ã⁄UÊ
’⁄U‹ÊU
Á‚¥ÉÊÊÒ⁄UË
Æ.xvÆ
•ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, (⁄UÊ.)
‚Ê…∏U -⁄‘Ufl - Œfl⁄U’Ë¡Ê
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. vÆ
∞fl¥ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ’⁄U‹Ê
◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
(¿U.ª.).
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ’⁄U‹Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1900
’◊Ã⁄UÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/vv/•-}w/wÆv{-v|.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸÃ
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ
„ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË
¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
’◊Ã⁄UÊ
’⁄U‹ÊU
‚Ê…∏U
Æ.{vy
•ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, (⁄UÊ.)
‚Ê…∏U -⁄‘Ufl - Œfl⁄U’Ë¡Ê
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. vy
∞fl¥ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË, ’⁄U‹Ê
◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ.
(¿U.ª.).
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ’⁄U‹Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
◊„UÊŒfl ∑§Êfl⁄‘U, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê äÊ◊Ã⁄UË,U ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ‚¥ÿÈÄà ‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥
•Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
äÊ◊Ã⁄UËU, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vz ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ w}/zxzy/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚
(y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ
∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
äÊ◊Ã⁄UË
∑ȧM§ŒU
÷πÊ⁄UÊ
w.xy
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
÷πÊ⁄UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. v|
‚ê÷ʪ, äÊ◊Ã⁄UË.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ∑ȧM§ŒU ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1901
äÊ◊Ã⁄UËU, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vz ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ w~/zxzz/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚
(y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ
∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
äÊ◊Ã⁄UË
∑ȧM§ŒU
Á‚„UÊŒ
y.vÆ
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
÷πÊ⁄UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. v~
‚ê÷ʪ, äÊ◊Ã⁄UË.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ∑ȧM§ŒU ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
‚Ë. •Ê⁄U. ¬˝‚ãŸÊ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ‚¥ÿÈÄà ‚Áøfl.
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê ⁄UÊÿª…∏U,U ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥
•Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wv/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
◊ÊÒ„UʬʋË
Æ.~{{
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1902
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ww/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
∑§⁄UÊπÊ‹
v.{zx
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wx/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
ŸÍŸŒ⁄U„UÊ
w.z~y
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1903
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wy/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
’ŸÊ߸U
Æ.vyx
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ yv/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
«UÊ‹‚⁄UÊ
v.v|w
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1904
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ yw/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
⁄UÊÿ∑§⁄UÊ
v.}{Æ
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ yx/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
¡⁄‘U∑§‹Ê
w.y}{
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1905
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ¬˝∑§⁄UáÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ yz/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v)
‚ (y) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ
¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë ‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚
∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ
∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
ŒË ªÿË ‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
⁄UÊÿª…∏U
Ã◊ŸÊ⁄U
¬Ã⁄UʬʋË
Æ.x~v
•¬⁄U ◊„Uʬ˝’¥äÊ∑§, ∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë.
∞Ÿ.≈UË.¬Ë.‚Ë. ⁄‘U‹ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁËÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë.
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ⁄UÊ¡Sfl, ÉÊ⁄UÉÊÊ«∏Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ ŒπÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
‡Êê◊Ë •ÊÁ’ŒË, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê ¡Ê¥¡ªË⁄U-øÊ¥¬Ê,U ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡Sfl
∞fl¥ •Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
¡Ê¥¡ªË⁄U-øÊ¥¬Ê, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ Æw/•-}w/wÆvy-vz/~zwy.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y)
◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
¡Ê¥¡ªË⁄U-øÊ¥¬Ê
¡Ê¥¡ªË⁄U
ÃãŒÍ÷Ê∆UÊ
Æ.ÆyÆ
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ (Á‚¥), ÷Í-
w&zÆÆ ◊¥ªÊflÊ≈U ◊«∏flÊ-
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. yx
•¡¸Ÿ ‚¥÷ʪ w&zÆÆ ◊.flÊ.ÃÊ.
ÃãŒÍ÷Ê∆UÊ Ãʬ ÁfllÈÃ
Áfl.¬Á⁄U. ◊«∏flÊ-ÃãŒÍ÷Ê∆UÊ (¿U.ª.)
¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã
⁄UÊπ«∏ ¬Ê߸U¬ ‹Ê߸UŸ
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¡Ê¥¡ªË⁄U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
ŸË⁄U¡ ∑ȧ◊Ê⁄U ’Ÿ‚Ê«∏, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1906
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U,U ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥
•Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ◊߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wÆx/vw/•-}w/wÆv}-v~.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
¬á«˛UÊ
∑ȧ«∏∑§ß¸U
Æ.zw~
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
¬á«˛UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. x
Áfl÷ʪ ¬á«˛UÊ ‚¥÷ʪ, ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
Á¡. Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ◊߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wÆy/vy/•-}w/wÆv}-v~.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
¬á«˛UÊ
÷ŒÊÒ⁄UÊ
x.Æ{x
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
¬á«˛UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. wv
Áfl÷ʪ ¬á«˛UÊ ‚¥÷ʪ, ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
Á¡. Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1907
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ◊߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wÆz/vz/•-}w/wÆv}-v~.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
¬á«˛UÊ
¬á«˛UÊ
v|.vx}
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
¬á«˛UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. v
Áfl÷ʪ ¬á«˛UÊ ‚¥÷ʪ, ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
Á¡. Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ◊߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wÆ{/vÆ/•-}w/wÆv}-v~.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
¬á«˛UÊ
•«∏÷Ê⁄U
|.}}v
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
¬á«˛UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. x
Áfl÷ʪ ¬á«˛UÊ ‚¥÷ʪ, ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
Á¡. Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1908
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ◊߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wÆ|/}/•-}w/wÆv}-v~.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
¬á«˛UÊ
‚◊⁄UÊ
v.Æ|Æ
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
¬á«˛UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. wv
Áfl÷ʪ ¬á«˛UÊ ‚¥÷ʪ, ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
Á¡. Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ◊߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ wÆ}/vx/•-}w/wÆv}-v~.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
¬á«˛UÊ
’¥äÊË
x.|}w
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
¬á«˛UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. vv
Áfl÷ʪ ¬á«˛UÊ ‚¥÷ʪ, ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
Á¡. Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1909
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ww}/vv/•-}w/wÆv}-v~.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ÿ„U ¬˝ÃËà „UÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ß‚‚ ‚¢‹ÇŸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (v) ‚ (y) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ ({) ◊¥ ©U‚∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹ÿ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU •ÕflÊ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ ¬«∏UŸ ∑§Ë
‚¢÷ÊflŸÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜
¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊÿªÊ) ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vv ∑§Ë ©U¬-äÊÊ⁄UÊ (v) ∑§ ©U¬’¥äÊÊ¥ ∑§ •ŸÈ‚Ê⁄U ‚÷Ë ‚¥’¥ÁäÊà √ÿÁQ§ÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ßU‚ •Ê‡Êÿ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøŸÊ
ŒË ¡ÊÃË „ÒU Á∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∞ÃŒ˜mÊ⁄UÊ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ πÊŸ (z) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË ∑§Ê ©UÄà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ŒË ªÿË
‡ÊÁÄÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿʪ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§ Á‹∞ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ
œÊ⁄UÊ vw mÊ⁄UÊ ¬˝ÊÁäÊ∑Χà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ
Á¡‹Ê
ÄU‚Ë‹
Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊
‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹
•Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË
∑§Ê fláʸŸ
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
(x)
(y)
(z)
({)
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U
¬á«˛UÊ
•◊⁄U¬È⁄U
|.z}}
∑§Êÿ¸¬Ê‹Ÿ •Á÷ÿ¥ÃÊ, ‹Ê∑§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
¬á«˛UÊ ’Êÿ¬Ê‚ ◊ʪ¸
¬.„U.Ÿ¥. vv
Áfl÷ʪ ¬á«˛UÊ ‚¥÷ʪ, ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U
ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
Á¡. Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË (⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ¬á«˛UÊ⁄UÊ«U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
¬Ë. ŒÿÊŸ¥Œ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê ∑§Ê⁄U’ÊU,
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬ ‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ,
⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥ •Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
∑§Ê⁄U’Ê, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ x ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/vvyv}/÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ/Æz • }w/wÆvz-v{.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ
‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚ ’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§
¬Œ (v) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹ÁπÃ
‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ,
¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê
•ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx
∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ) ∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ
¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-∑§Ê⁄U’Ê
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-∑§⁄UËÊ
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-π⁄UflÊŸË
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-Æ.Æ}Æ „UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
zÆx
Æ.Æwy
zÆy
Æ.ÆwÆ
zÆz/v
Æ.ÆÆy
zÆz/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
zÆz/x
Æ.ÆÆ}
zvv/v
Æ.Æv{
ÿʪ
{
Æ.Æ}Æ
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU- ’Ê‹¬È⁄U-
⁄UË¥flʬÊ⁄U-π⁄UflÊŸË-‚Ê„Uʪ¬È⁄U ◊ʪ¸ ¬⁄U ‚ÊŸ ŸŒË ¬⁄U ©UìÊ SÃ⁄UËÿ
‚ÃÈ ∑§ ¬„È¥Uø ◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ∑§Ê⁄U’Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1910
∑§Ê⁄U’Ê, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ y ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/vvzÆx/÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ/Æ~ • }w/wÆvz-v{.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ
‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚ ’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§
¬Œ (v) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹ÁπÃ
‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ,
¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê
•ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx
∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ) ∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ
¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-∑§Ê⁄U’Ê
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-∑§⁄UËÊ
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-‚⁄U߸U¬Ê‹Ë
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-Æ.Æw} „UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
x{{
Æ.Æw}
ÿʪ
v
Æ.Æw}
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU- ’Ê‹¬È⁄U-
⁄UË¥flʬÊ⁄U (Œ⁄Uʸ÷Ê¥∆UÊ) ‚⁄U߸U¬Ê‹Ë-π⁄UflÊŸË ◊ʪ¸ ¬⁄U ‚ÊŸ ŸŒË ¬⁄U
‚ÃÈ ∑§ ¬„È¥Uø ◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ∑§Ê⁄U’Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
∑§Ê⁄U’Ê, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ y ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§/vvzÆ{/÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ/vÆ • }w/wÆvz-v{.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ
‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚ ’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§
¬Œ (v) ◊¥ flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹ÁπÃ
‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ,
¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U ¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê
•ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U •ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx
∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ) ∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ
¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-∑§Ê⁄U’Ê
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-∑§⁄UËÊ
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-Œ⁄Uʸ÷Ê¥∆UÊ
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-Æ.x{ ∞∑§«∏
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(∞∑§«∏ ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
vzz
Æ.Æ{v/w
v{|
Æ.Æxv/w
vz{
Æ.Æ|v/w
vz}/v
Æ.Æx
vz}/w
Æ.Æx
vz~
Æ.Æwv/w
v{Æ
Æ.Æx
v{}/v
Æ.Æw
v{}/w
Æ.Æv
v{}/x
Æ.Æw
v{}/y
Æ.Æw
ÿʪ
vv
Æ.x{
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU- ’Ê‹¬È⁄U-
⁄UË¥flʬÊ⁄U (Œ⁄Uʸ÷Ê¥∆UÊ) ‚⁄U߸U¬Ê‹Ë-π⁄UflÊŸË ◊ʪ¸ ¬⁄U ‚ÊŸ ŸŒË ¬⁄U
‚ÃÈ ∑§ ¬„È¥Uø ◊ʪ¸ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ∑§Ê⁄U’Ê ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
◊Ê. ∑Ò§‚⁄U •éŒÈ‹ „U∑§, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U, Á¡‹Ê ⁄UÊÿª…∏U,
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∞fl¢ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬ ‚Áøfl, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ,
⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥ •Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vÆ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ Æ~/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚
’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (v) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§
¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U
¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U
•ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ)
∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§
©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1911
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-⁄UÊÿª…∏U
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-•Ê«U∑§⁄UÊ
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-z.~}x „UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
wvv/v
Æ.Æyz
wvw
Æ.Æ}Æ
wx~/w
Æ.Æ{z
w{y/vπ
Æ.Æ|w
xv|/x∑§
Æ.Æ}z
xv|/xπ
Æ.Æyy
w}}/v∑§, w}}/vø
Æ.wvw
xvz, xv{, xv|/v, xv|/|
Æ.Æwy
yÆz/v
Æ.Ævw
y~w/v
Æ.Æ}}
vxw/v
Æ.Æ}v
zvÆ/y
Æ.Æwz
w}|/w
Æ.Æw}
zvy/v
Æ.Æ{y
zv|/w
Æ.Ævx
zxz/w
Æ.Æ}Æ
wz{
Æ.Æwy
w{y/z
Æ.Æ{~
vw~
Æ.vÆz
vy}/v
Æ.Æyy
vzÆ/v
Æ.ÆÆy
vxx/w
Æ.Æz{
|Æ
Æ.ÆÆ}
|}/w
Æ.Æw~
}~
Æ.Æ|x
wvv/x
Æ.Æy}
wv}/w
Æ.Æ~w
wx}/w
Æ.vÆv
w{y/{
Æ.Æ}~
yÆz/wπ, yÆz/xπ
Æ.Æz{
yÆz/w∑§, yÆz/x∑§
Æ.Æ{y
w}}/w
Æ.Æyv
y{w/v, y{w/x
Æ.ÆÆ~
yÆy/w
Æ.Æ}v
yÆ}/w
Æ.Æzx
y~y/}
Æ.Æ{v
zvw/y
Æ.Æy}
(v)
(w)
xv|/w
Æ.Æ{}
zvz/v
Æ.Æzx
zv{/x
Æ.ÆÆ}
wzz
Æ.Æ}}
zxz/{
Æ.Æ|x
zx{/y
Æ.vwz
vyx
Æ.ÆÆy
vzÆ/y
Æ.Æ{z
vxv
Æ.Æ|w
vxy/v
Æ.ÆÆ~
||
Æ.Æ|x
}x/v
Æ.Æzx
~Æ/x
Æ.vÆz
wvv/y
Æ.Æxx
wv}/y
Æ.vÆ~
wx~/x
Æ.Ævx
w{y/x∑§
Æ.Æxx
w{y/xª
Æ.Æ{z
y~v/yÉÊ
Æ.Æ{y
yÆy/v
Æ.ÆÆ~
y~w/w
Æ.vv{
yÆ}/v
Æ.Æ}y
zvx/w
Æ.Æy~
zvÆ/v
Æ.Æ{y
zvx/x
Æ.Æw~
zvv/v
Æ.Æy~
zv{/v
Æ.Æzx
zv{/y
Æ.Æ{z
wÆ~/v
Æ.Æ{Æ
zxz/|
Æ.Æ}y
}{/w
Æ.vwv
vy{
Æ.Æv{
vy~
Æ.Æyv
~Æ/w
Æ.Æxw
y~/vπ/v
Æ.vvx
|z/v
Æ.Æv{
}z
Æ.Æ{y
~w/v∑§
Æ.Æwz
wx}/v
Æ.Æz{
wv~/v
Æ.Æv{
wyÆ/x
Æ.Ævx
w}}/vª, w}}/væ§
Æ.Æwv
w}|/v
Æ.vxw
zvx/v
Æ.Æwz
y~v/|
Æ.Æ}v
xwÆ
Æ.Æ{y
x~w
Æ.vÆ~
y~y/x, y~y/y
Æ.Æ{~
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1912
(v)
(w)
vxw/w
Æ.ÆyÆ
yÆz/wÉÊ, yÆz/xÉÊ
Æ.Æz{
zvv/|
Æ.Æ~v
zv|/v
Æ.Æ{v
zv}/vª
Æ.Æxw
wvÆ/v
Æ.Æzw
zx{/~
Æ.vxx
vw}
Æ.Æ~|
vy|
Æ.Æyy
vy}/w
Æ.Æ{}
vxw/x
Æ.Æwz
y~/væ§
Æ.vvw
|{/v
Æ.v}v
}|/v, }|/w
Æ.Æw~
ÿʪ
~~
z.~}x
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU-∑§‹Ê ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ
∑§ •Ê«∏∑§⁄UÊ, ÃÈ⁄¥UªÊ ∞fl¥ ∑§‹◊Ë ◊ÊßUŸ⁄U Ÿ„U⁄U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ⁄UÊÿª…∏U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vÆ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ vÆ/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚
’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (v) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§
¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U
¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U
•ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ)
∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§
©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-⁄UÊÿª…∏U
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-∑§Ê‚◊¥ŒÊ
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-w.w}} „UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
v/x, w/x
Æ.Æ|x
(v)
(w)
{
Æ.Æxw
|/w
Æ.Æ{z
v}/v
Æ.vwv
v}/y
Æ.vvx
wxw/v
Æ.Æw}
v{|/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
wv}
Æ.ÆÆ}
v{y/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
wwz/w
Æ.Æwy
vz~/v
Æ.Ævw
www/z}w
Æ.ÆÆ}
v{v/v
Æ.Æwx
vz{/v
Æ.Æx{
ww|/v
Æ.ÆÆ}
www/z}v/w
Æ.ÆwÆ
v{y/}
Æ.ÆÆ}
v}/z
Æ.Æ}z
|/v
Æ.ÆÆ}
wxv/z
Æ.ÆyÆ
wx{/z
Æ.ÆÆ}
ww}/x
Æ.ÆwÆ
wxw/x
Æ.Æzx
wv~/v
Æ.Æv{
wv|
Æ.ÆÆ}
vzÆ/y
Æ.Ævw
ww|/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
v{w/w
Æ.Ævw
www
Æ.ÆÆ}
wwÆ/{
Æ.Ævw
wvy
Æ.Æw}
vy/w
Æ.vwz
vzÆ/w
Æ.Æwy
vzÆ/{
Æ.Ævw
wx{/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
wxw/w
Æ.Æzy
wxw/y
Æ.Ævy
v}/w
Æ.vwz
wxy
Æ.ÆÆ}
ww~
Æ.Æv{
wwx/v
Æ.ÆÆy
vzy/v
Æ.Ævw
wxx/w
Æ.Æww
wxx/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
vz}/x
Æ.ÆwÆ
vzÆ/v∑§
Æ.Æxz
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1913
(v)
(w)
wwÆ/v
Æ.ÆÆ}
vy~/v
Æ.v}w
wvx/v
Æ.Æzx
vzÆ/x
Æ.ÆwÆ
vzÆ/|
Æ.Ævw
vy}, vy~/w
Æ.v}z
}y/{
Æ.ÆvÆ
v{Æ/z
Æ.ÆwÆ
v}/x
Æ.vvx
wv~/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
wwx/w
Æ.ÆwÆ
v{{
Æ.Æw}
wv{
Æ.Æw}
vz|/v
Æ.Æwy
vzÆ/z
Æ.Ævw
wwv/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
wwv/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
vzz
Æ.ÆÆ}
wxÆ/v
Æ.Æwy
www/z}Æ/v
Æ.Ævw
vzÆ/~
Æ.Æy~
v{y/|
Æ.ÆÆ}
ÿʪ
{}
w.w}}
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU-∑§‹Ê ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ
∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ’ÊÉÊÊ«UÊ‹Ê ◊ÊßUŸ⁄U Ÿ„U⁄U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ⁄UÊÿª…∏U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vÆ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ vv/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚
’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (v) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§
¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U
¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U
•ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ)
∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§
©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-⁄UÊÿª…∏U
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-w.y}{ „UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
vv}|/v
Æ.vy}
vww~/w
Æ.Æ}}
vwyv/y
Æ.Ævw
vwy}/v
Æ.Ævw
vw~{
Æ.Æx{
vw~w
Æ.Æwy
vw~Æ
Æ.Ævw
vyzÆ/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
vzwy/w
Æ.ÆyÆ
vyzv/w
Æ.Æv{
vwyz/y
Æ.Æwy
vzwv
Æ.ÆyÆ
vzw{/v
Æ.Æ{Æ
vv}~/v
Æ.Æv{
vv}|/w
Æ.vÆ}
vww~/y
Æ.Æ{}
vwyz/x
Æ.ÆwÆ
vw|x/w
Æ.Æ{y
vw|z/v
Æ.Æz|
vw}v/w
Æ.Æwy
vw}z/w
Æ.Ævw
vyzw/v
Æ.Æ}Æ
vzw{/w
Æ.Æzw
vww~/x
Æ.Æw}
vzwy/v
Æ.ÆyÆ
vwyy/v
Æ.Ævw
vzv~
Æ.Æw}
vvzz/v
Æ.Æ~x
vv}}/v
Æ.Æzw
vwyw/v
Æ.Ævw
vwy}/x
Æ.Æ|w
vw|x/x
Æ.ÆwÆ
vw|z/w
Æ.Ævw
vw}z/v
Æ.Ævw
vw}}
Æ.vÆ}
vzwÆ/w
Æ.Æv{
vzw|/v
Æ.Æx{
vwyv/w
Æ.Æ{y
vzww
Æ.Æyy
vw}y/w
Æ.v{Æ
vyyv/v
Æ.Æxw
vvzz/x
Æ.Æz{
vv~|/v
Æ.Ævw
vwyv/x
Æ.Æyy
vwy}/y
Æ.v}}
vw|x/vπ
Æ.Æz{
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1914
(v)
(w)
v~{
Æ.v~w
vyz/w
Æ.Æ{y
vyx
Æ.ÆÆ}
vzy/v
Æ.Æy}
yy{
Æ.Æv{
yyz/w
Æ.Æx{
yvw
Æ.Æ{Æ
yxz/v∑§
Æ.ÆÆ}
v|~/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
yxy/v
Æ.Æv{
ywv/w
Æ.Æz{
vÆv
Æ.ÆÆ}
v~z/w
Æ.Æw}
~|
Æ.v~w
wÆx/v∑§
Æ.Æz|
wÆw
Æ.Æyy
w|x/wπ
Æ.Æwy
vy|
Æ.ÆwÆ
v}z
Æ.Æzw
yyy/v
Æ.Æwy
yyv
Æ.vwÆ
ywÆ/w
Æ.Æy}
w|x/w∑§
Æ.Æwy
v|}/w
Æ.Æwy
yxy/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
yww/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
vz|/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
yxz/wπ
Æ.Æv{
~}/v
Æ.vwÆ
wÆx/vÉÊ
Æ.ÆÆ}
yvx
Æ.Æ{}
vyz/v
Æ.Æ}y
wÆx/væ§
Æ.Æ{v
v}Æ/w
Æ.Ævw
yyy/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
yv|
Æ.Æ{Æ
v}{/x
Æ.Æ~x
v}{/v
Æ.Æv{
w|x/wª
Æ.Æw}
ywv/v
Æ.Æwy
yxz/vπ
Æ.Æw}
vz}/y
Æ.Ævw
v~z/x
Æ.Æw}
~~/v
Æ.Æ|w
v|z
Æ.Æx{
yv{
Æ.ÆÆ}
vyy
Æ.Ævw
vzv
Æ.Æw}
v|{
Æ.Æ}y
(v)
(w)
vw}w
Æ.ÆÆ}
vw}~
Æ.Æx{
vyzÆ/v
Æ.Æv{
vzw}/v
Æ.Æyy
vyzv/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
vwyz/w
Æ.Æ~w
vyzÆ/x
Æ.ÆÆ}
vyy}/x
Æ.Æxw
vyxw/w
Æ.Ævw
ÿʪ
zz
w.y}{
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU-∑§‹Ê ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ
∑§ Ã‹Ë¬Ê‹Ë ÁflÃ⁄U∑§ Ÿ„U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U ◊ÊßUŸ⁄U-w Ÿ„U⁄U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ
„UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ⁄UÊÿª…∏U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vÆ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ vw/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚
’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (v) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§
¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U
¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U
•ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ)
∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§
©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-⁄UÊÿª…∏U
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-Œ⁄U˸¬Ê‹Ë
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-w.{v{ „UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
vÆÆ
Æ.Æ}}
vz}/x
Æ.Æwy
w|y
Æ.ÆÆ}
v|}/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1915
(v)
(w)
yyz/v
Æ.ÆyÆ
yww/v
Æ.ÆÆ}
v~z/v
Æ.Æw}
vz|/v
Æ.Æw~
yv~/v
Æ.Æz{
v||
Æ.v{Æ
ywv/x
Æ.Æx{
ÿʪ
{Æ
w.{v{
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU-∑§‹Ê ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ
∑§ Œ⁄U˸¬Ê‹Ë ◊ÊßUŸ⁄U Ÿ„U⁄U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ⁄UÊÿª…∏U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
⁄UÊÿª…∏U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vÆ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ vx/•-}w/wÆv|-v}.óøÍ¢Á∑§ ⁄UÊÖÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§Ê ß‚
’Êà ∑§Ê ‚◊ʜʟ „UÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ŸËø ŒË ªß¸ •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (v) ◊¥
flÁáʸà ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ‚ÍøË ∑§ ¬Œ (w) ◊¥ ©UÀ‹Áπà ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§
¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU. •Ã— ÷ÍÁ◊ •¡¸Ÿ, ¬ÈŸflʸ‚Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U
¬ÈŸ√ÿ¸flSÕʬŸ ◊¥ ©UÁøà ¬˝ÁÃ∑§⁄U •ÊÒ⁄U ¬Ê⁄UŒÁ‡Ê¸ÃÊ ∑§Ê •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄U
•ÁœÁŸÿ◊, wÆvx (Á¡‚ ∞ÃŒ˜ ¬‡øÊØ •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊ wÆvx ∑§„UÊ ¡ÊflªÊ)
∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ v~ ∑§ •ãê¸Ã ß‚∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ÿ„U ÉÊÊÁ·Ã Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU Á∑§
©UQ§ ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ë ©UQ§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ ∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU —ó
•ŸÈ‚ÍøË
(v) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê fláʸŸ-
(∑§) Á¡‹Ê-⁄UÊÿª…∏U
(π) ÄU‚Ë‹-¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U
(ª) Ÿª⁄U/ª˝Ê◊-‚⁄UÊ߸U¬Ê‹Ë
(ÉÊ) ‹ª÷ª ˇÊòÊ»§‹-w.|yÆ „UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U
π‚⁄UÊ Ÿê’⁄U
⁄U∑§’Ê
(„UÄ≈Uÿ⁄U ◊¥)
(v)
(w)
z{/v
Æ.wÆ}
zv/w
Æ.Æv{
zv/x
Æ.Æxw
yz}/v
Æ.v{}
{}
Æ.Æ~{
wÆv/v
Æ.vÆÆ
v}}/w
Æ.Æ{Æ
{{/v
Æ.Æ{Æ
(v)
(w)
y}/x
Æ.vw}
yz|/y
Æ.ÆyÆ
vw{/y
Æ.Æ}y
yz}/w
Æ.Æy}
zw/x
Æ.Æz{
vwz/v
Æ.Æ{y
y~/v
Æ.wvw
y{
Æ.vÆÆ
wÆx
Æ.Æ{}
v}}/x
Æ.vÆÆ
v}}/{
Æ.Æ{Æ
vw|/z
Æ.Æz{
y|/v
Æ.ÆwÆ
zx/x
Æ.Æzw
v}}/z
Æ.Æwy
yz}/y
Æ.Æxw
vw{/w
Æ.Æ{Æ
vw{/{
Æ.Ævw
wÆÆ
Æ.ÆyÆ
vw|/w
Æ.Æ{}
wÆw/v
Æ.Æz{
v}}/|
Æ.Ævw
v}}/}
Æ.Æy}
z~/v
Æ.Æ|w
v}|/v
Æ.Æv{
y|/x
Æ.vÆÆ
yz|/w
Æ.Æx{
{y
Æ.ÆyÆ
zw/y
Æ.Æyy
zw/z
Æ.ÆÆ}
wÆv/w
Æ.ÆÆ}
wÆz
Æ.Ævw
yz{/y
Æ.Æwy
v}}/~
Æ.Æw}
{|
Æ.Æzw
zx/v
Æ.Æ{y
v~~/w
Æ.Æxw
{{/w
Æ.Ævw
yz|/z
Æ.Ævw
ÿʪ
y|
w.|yÆ
(w) ‚Êfl¸¡ÁŸ∑§ ¬˝ÿÊ¡Ÿ Á¡‚∑§ Á‹∞ •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ÃÊ „ÒU-∑§‹Ê ¬Á⁄UÿÊ¡ŸÊ
∑§ ¬È‚ÊÒ⁄U ◊ÊßUŸ⁄U-x ∞fl¥ ∑§‹◊Ë ◊ÊßUŸ⁄U Ÿ„U⁄U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ „UÃÈ.
(x) ÷ÍÁ◊ ∑§Ê§ŸÄ‡ÊÊ (å‹ÊŸ) ∑§Ê ÁŸ⁄UˡÊáÊ •ŸÈÁfl÷ʪËÿ •ÁäÊ∑§Ê⁄UË
(⁄UÊ¡Sfl), ⁄UÊÿª…∏U ∑§ ∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊¥ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „ÒU.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ∑§ ⁄UÊíÿ¬Ê‹ ∑§ ŸÊ◊ ‚ ÃÕÊ •ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
‡Êê◊Ë •ÊÁ’ŒË, ∑§‹Ä≈U⁄U ∞fl¥ ¬ŒŸ ©U¬-‚Áøfl.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1916
Áfl÷ʪ ¬˝◊ÈπÊ¥ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ÁŸ¡Ë Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ, ÁflÁŸÿÊ◊∑§ •Êÿʪ
◊äÊÈ Á¬À‹ øÊÒ∑§, ⁄UÊ◊ ◊¥ÁŒ⁄U ∑§ ‚Ê◊Ÿ ‡ÊÊ¥Áà Ÿª⁄U, ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U (¿U.ª.)
⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ||z/¬Ë.ÿÍ./¬Á⁄UÁŸÿ◊/wÆvz.ó¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ©UìÊ Á‡ÊˇÊÊ Áfl÷ʪ ∑§ ¬òÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ∞»§ vz-x/wÆv{/w}-w ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§
Æ}-Æw-wÆv} ∑§ ¬Á⁄U¬Ê‹Ÿ ◊¥ •Ê.¬Ë.Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ mÊ⁄UÊ ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ÁŸ¡Ë Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ (SÕʬŸÊ ∞fl¥ ‚¥øÊ‹Ÿ) •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊-wÆÆz
∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ w} ∑§Ë ©U¬äÊÊ⁄UÊ y ∑§ ¬˝ÊfläÊÊŸ ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã •äÿÊŒ‡Ê ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ ◊¥ ¬˝∑§Ê‡ÊŸ ∑§ ¬Ífl¸ ’Ë.≈U∑§. •ÊÒ⁄U ∞◊.≈U∑§. ∑§ ¬Ê∆˜Uÿ∑˝§◊ ‚òÊ wÆvz-v{
◊¥ ¬˝Ê⁄¥U÷ Á∑§ÿ ªÿ Õ. ßUŸ ¬Ê∆˜Uÿ∑˝§◊Ê¥ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥ ÁŸêŸÁ‹Áπà ‡ÊÃÊZ ∑§ •äÊËŸ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ ∑§Ê •ÊªÊ◊Ë •Êfl‡ÿ∑§ ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„UË ∑§⁄UŸ „UÃÈ
•ÊŒÁ‡Êà Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU —ó
v.
⁄UÊíÿ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ mÊ⁄UÊ ¬òÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ∞»§ vz-x/wÆv{/x}-w ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vy-Æ~-wÆv| ∑§ ◊Êäÿ◊ ‚ ¿UÊòÊ-Á„Uà ∑§Ê äÿÊŸ ◊¥ ⁄Uπ∑§⁄U •Ê.¬Ë.
Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ ∑§Ê ’Ë.≈U∑§. •ÊÒ⁄U ∞◊.≈U∑§. ◊¥ ‚òÊ wÆvz-v{ ◊¥ ¬˝flÁ‡Êà ¿UÊòÊÊ¥ ∑§Ê ∞∑§ ’Ê⁄U (One Time) ÷ÍˡÊËÿ ¬˝÷Êfl
‚ ∑§ÊÿʸûÊ⁄U SflË∑ΧÁà ŒË ªß¸U „ÒU.
w.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ©UìÊ Á‡ÊˇÊÊ Áfl÷ʪ ∑§Ë •ÁäÊ‚ÍøŸÊ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ {ÆÆy/w~z|/wÆvz/x}-w ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w}-Æ~-wÆv{ ∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ •Ê.¬Ë.
Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ ∑§ ’Ë.≈U∑§. •ÊÒ⁄U ∞◊.≈U∑§. ∑§ •äÿÊŒ‡Ê ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ ◊¥ ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ÁŸ¡Ë Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ (SÕʬŸÊ ∞fl¥ ‚¥øÊ‹Ÿ)
•ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊-wÆÆz ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ w} ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡Êà „UÊ øÈ∑§ „Ò¥U.
x.
•Ê.¬Ë. Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ Ÿ ¬Á⁄UfløŸ ÁŒÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ‚òÊ wÆvz-v{ ◊¥ ¬˝Ê⁄¥U÷ ’Ë.≈U∑§. •ÊÒ⁄U ∞◊.≈U∑§. ¬Ê∆˜Uÿ∑˝§◊ ∑§Ë ‚¥⁄UøŸÊ •ÊÒ⁄U
¬⁄UˡÊÊ ∑§Ë ÿÊ¡ŸÊ ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ ◊¥ ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡Êà •äÿÊŒ‡Ê ∑§ •ŸÈM§¬ „ÒU.
y.
•Ê. ¬Ë. Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ Ÿ ‚ÍøË ¬˝SÃÈà ∑§Ë „ÒU, Á¡‚◊¥ ¿UÊòÊÊ¥ ∑§ ŸÊ◊, Á¬ÃÊ ∑§Ê ŸÊ◊, ¡ã◊ ÁÃÁÕ, ¬Ê∆˜Uÿ∑˝§◊ ◊¥ ¬˝fl‡Ê ∑§Ë ÁÃÁÕ
∑§Ê Áflfl⁄UáÊ „ÒU. (‚ÍøË ‚¥‹ÇŸ∑§-v ∑§ M§¬ ◊¥ ‚¥‹ÇŸ „ÒU).
z.
•Ê. ¬Ë. Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ mÊ⁄UÊ ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ÁŸ¡Ë Áfl‡ÁfllÊ‹ÿ (SÕʬŸÊ ∞fl¥ ‚¥øÊ‹Ÿ) •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊-wÆÆz ∑§Ë äÊÊ⁄UÊ vw(∑§) ∑§
¬Ê‹Ÿ ◊¥ ÁŸäÊʸÁ⁄Uà ‡ÊÈÀ∑§ ⁄UÊÁ‡Ê, ÁflÁŸÿÊ◊∑§ •Êÿʪ ∑§ ¬Ê‚ ßU‚ •ÊŒ‡Ê ∑§ ¬˝∑§Ê‡ÊŸ ∑§Ë ÁÃÁÕ ∑§ ÃËŸ ‚åÃÊ„U ∑§ •¥Œ⁄U ¡◊Ê ∑§⁄UŸÊ
‚ÈÁŸÁ‡øà ∑§⁄‘UªÊ.
{.
•Ê. ¬Ë. Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ mÊ⁄UÊ ∞‚ ¿UÊòÊÊ¥ ∑§Ë ‚ÍøË, Á¡ã„¥U ©U¬ÊÁäÊ ¬˝ŒÊŸ ∑§Ë ¡ÊŸË „ÒU, ¬Ê∆˜Uÿ∑˝§◊ ¬Íáʸ „UÊŸ ∑§ ∞∑§ ◊Ê„U ∑§ •ãŒ⁄U
•Êÿʪ ∑§Ê ¬˝SÃÈà ∑§⁄‘UªÊ.
|.
•Ê. ¬Ë. Á¡¥Œ‹ Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ Ÿ ¬Á⁄UfløŸ ÁŒÿÊ „ÒU Á∑§ ÁflÁ÷㟠•Á÷∑§⁄UáÊÊ¥ ∑§ mÊ⁄UÊ ¡Ê⁄UË ÁŒ‡ÊÊ-ÁŸŒ¸‡ÊÊ¥ ∑§Ê ¬Ê‹Ÿ Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ „ÒU.
ÿ„U •ÊŒ‡Ê ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ÁŸ¡Ë Áfl‡flÁfllÊ‹ÿ ÁflÁŸÿÊ◊∑§ ∑§Ë ’Ò∆U∑§ ∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ vÆv/wÆv} ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ w~-Æ{-wÆv} ◊¥ Á‹ÿ ªÿ ÁŸáʸÿ ∑§
¬Á⁄U¬Ê‹Ÿ ◊¥ ¡Ê⁄UË Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU.
«UÊÚ. ’Ë. «UË. ÕŒ‹ÊŸË,
‚Áøfl.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1917
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1918
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1919
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1920
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1921
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1922
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1923
Chhattisgarh
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1924
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1925
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1926
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1927
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1928
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1929
∑§Êÿʸ‹ÿ ◊ÈÅÿ ÁŸflʸøŸ ¬ŒÊÁœ∑§Ê⁄UË, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U
‡ÊÊSòÊË øÊÒ∑§, ¬È⁄UÊŸÊU ◊¢òÊÊ‹ÿ ¬Á⁄U‚⁄U, ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U
⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wÆ ◊Êø¸ wÆv}
»§Ê.∑˝§-v}/Æx/ÁŸflʸøŸ ÿÊÁø∑§Ê/wÆv}/~vx.ó÷Ê⁄Uà ÁŸflʸøŸ •Êÿʪ, Ÿß¸ ÁŒÀ‹Ë mÊ⁄UÊ ¡Ê⁄UË •Áœ‚ÍøŸÊ ‚¢ÅÿÊ }w/¿U.ª.-Áfl.‚./
(v{/wÆvy)/wÆv} ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ vx-Æx-wÆv}— ‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÁÃÁŸÁœàfl •ÁœÁŸÿ◊, v~zv (v~zv ∑§Ê yx) ∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ vÆ{ (π) ∑§ •ŸÈ‚⁄UáÊ ◊¥ ÁŸflʸøŸ
•Êÿʪ ∞ÃŒ˜Ô mÊ⁄UÊ ÁŸflʸøŸ •¡Ë¸ ‚¢ÅÿÊ-v{/wÆvy ◊¥ ÁŒ∞ ª∞ ©UìÊ ãÿÊÿÊ‹ÿ, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U ∑§ ÃÊ⁄UËπ Æ} ÁŒ‚ê’⁄U, wÆv} ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê
∑§Ê ⁄UÊÖÿ ∑§ ‡ÊÊ‚∑§Ëÿ ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ ◊¥ ‚fl¸‚ÊœÊ⁄UáÊ ∑§Ë ¡ÊŸ∑§Ê⁄UË „UÃÈ ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡Êà Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU.
(‚È’˝Ã ‚Ê„ÍU)
◊ÈÅÿ ÁŸflʸøŸ ¬ŒÊÁœ∑§Ê⁄UË.
÷Ê⁄Uà ÁŸflʸøŸ •Êÿʪ
ÁŸflʸøŸ ‚ŒŸ, •‡ÊÊ∑§ ⁄UÊ«U, Ÿß¸ ÁŒÀ‹Ë-vvÆÆÆv
Ÿß¸ ÁŒÀ‹Ë, ÃÊ⁄UËπ vx ◊Êø¸, wÆv}óww »§ÊÀªÈŸ, v~x~ (‡Ê∑§)
‚¢. }w/¿U.ª.-Áfl.‚./(v{/wÆvy)/wÆv}.ó‹Ê∑§ ¬˝ÁÃÁŸÁœàfl •ÁœÁŸÿ◊, v~zv (v~zv ∑§Ê yx) ∑§Ë œÊ⁄UÊ vÆ{ (π) ∑§ •ŸÈ‚⁄UáÊ
◊¥, ÁŸflʸøŸ •Êÿʪ ∞ÃŒ˜ÔmÊ⁄UÊ ÁŸflʸøŸ •¡Ë¸ ‚¢. v{/wÆvy ◊¥ ÁŒÿ ªÿ ©UìÊ ãÿÊÿÊ‹ÿ, ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U, Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U ∑§ ÃÊ⁄UËπ Æ} ÁŒ‚ê’⁄U, wÆv| ∑§
•ÊŒ‡Ê ∑§Ê ¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡Êà ∑§⁄UÃÊ „ÒU.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
EP No. 16 of 2014
PETITIONER
:
Rupdhar Pudo S/o Jalluram Pudo Aged About 30 years R/o Village-Dargarh, P.O.
Sadhu-Michgaon, Tah Durgukondal, P.S. Kodeknurse, Distt. Kanker C.G., Pin-
494669.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS :
1.
Bhojraj Nag S/o Laxminath Nag Aged About 42 Yeas R/o Village-Himoda, P.O.
P.S. & Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker, C.G.
2.
Manturam Pawar S/o Subran Singh Pawar Aged About 47 years R/o Pakhanjur
P.O. And P.S. Pakhanjur, Tah. Pakhanjur, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
3.
Jaiprakash Padmakar Padda S/o M.R. Padmakar Padda Aged About 30 Years R/o
Gawdepara, Ward No. 15, P.O. & P.S. Bhanupratappur, Tah. Bhanupratappur,
Distt. Uttar Bastar, Kanker C.G.
4.
Anil Netam S/o Daniram Netam Aged About 38 Yeas R/o Chikhli, P.O. Useli,
Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar, Kanker C.G.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1930
5.
Bhim Singh Usendi S/o Mayaram Usendi Aged Acbout 36 years R/o Bade Jaitpur,
Post Office-Kamta, P.S. And Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
6.
Devnath Hidko S/o Sunher Hidko Aged About 27 years R/o Pufgaon, P.O. &
P.S. Antagarh, Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar, Kanker C.G.
7.
Mahadev Mandavi S/o Vishalram Mandavi Aged about 27 Years R/o Koilibeda
Chandni Chowk, P.O. And P.S. Koilibeda, Tah. Pakhanjur Distt. Uttar Bastar
Kanker
C.G.
8.
Parsuram Pawar S/o Jagoram Pawar Aged About 44 Years R/o Belgal Sitlapara,
P.O. Tekameta, P.S. Bande, Tah. Pakhanjur, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
9.
Raghunath Kumeti S/o Late Samrath Kumeti Aged About 42 Years R/o Tenkal
Patelpara, House No. 26 P.O. And P.S. Antagarh, Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar
Bastar Kanker C.G.
10.
Savita Pawar W/o Manturam Pawar Aged About 35 Years R/o Pakhanjur P.O.
And P.S. Pakhanjur, Tah. Pakhanjur, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
11.
Shankarlal Netam S/o Late Sukhlal Netam Aged About 25 Years R/o imlipadar,
P.O. and P.S. Antagarh, Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
12.
Virendra Kumar Hidami S/o Sagruram Hidami Aged About 25 Years R/o Sarandi
Uparpara, P.O. Sarandi, P.S. And Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
For the Petitoner
:
Mr. Sudeep Verma Advocate
For the Respondent No. 1 :
Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Advocate
For the intervener
:
Mr. Himanshu Kr. Sharma, Adv.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri
C. A. V. JUDGMENT
Judgment reserved on 15.11.2017
Judgment delivered on 08.12.2017
1.
The primary relief sought in this petition is to declare the election of returned candidate Bhojraj Nag who
was declared elected in the by-election of Chhattisgarh State Legislative Assembly Area No. 79 of Antagarh
Constituency as held on 13.09.2014.
2.
The instant petition is under Sections 80 & 80-A read with section 81 of the Representation of the People
Act., 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1951). The grounds which are urged in this petition are that
respondent No. 1 has resorted to corrupt practice thereby the result of election is liable to be set aside.
3.
The brief facts of the case are that initially in the year 2013, the general election to the Antagarh Legislative
Assembly was conducted by the Election Commission. The present election petition is concerned with the
result of by-election of Legislative Assembly Area no. 79 of Antagarh Constituency held on 13.09.2014.
After the initial election of 2013, the returned candidate who was elected in the year 2013 had vacated the
seat therefore new notification for election was issued. The election Commission thereafter issued notifica-
tion on 20.08.2014 to conduct by-election for the Antagarh Constituency and the following dates were fixed
for conducting the election.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1931
S. No.
Event
Date
1.
Issue of notification
20-08-2014
2.
Last date for filling nominations
27-08-2014
3.
Scrutiny of nominations
28-08-2014
4.
Last date for withdrawal of candidatures
30-08-2014
5.
Date of Polling
13-09-2014
6.
Counting of votes
16-09-2014
7.
Date before which the election shall be completed
19-09-2014
4.
After the result of polling, respondent no. 1 was declared as returned candidate.
5.
(i)
Mr. Sudeep Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that as per
the election programme, the last date of withdrawal of candidature was on 30-08-2014 and out of
13 candidates who had filled their nominations, 11 had withdrawn their candidature. The petitoner
belongs to ambedkarite Party of India and the repondent returned candidat belongs to Bhartiya
Janta Party. It is stated that in order to pressurize withdrawal of the candidates who were 11 in
number undue influence and pressure tactics were adopted by the respondent returned candidate. It
is stated that the petitioner was also approached and request was made to him for withdrawal of his
candidature through mobile of one Omprakash Gupta and money was offered but the petitioner did
not accept the same.
(ii)
It is further stated that during such conversation it was also disclosed that the candidature of Indian
National Congress has withdrawn his candidature by use of undue influence and by payment of
money, therefore, the corrupt practice was adopted by the respondent it is furhter submitted that
the petitioner had visited various polling booths on the date of polling on 13.09.2014 and it was
found that different voters were carried to the polling booths in different vehicles, It was stated that
having enquired, it was revealed that the voters were being brought to the polling stations at the
behest of respondent no. 1 and in lieu of thereof amount was paid by respondent no. 1 therefore the
same also amounts to corrupt practice. Further, it is submitted that free supply of fruits was made
to the voters apart from various means of conveyance used to carry the voters to the polling booths.
(iii)
Referring to the pleadings and statements, learned counsel would submit that the oral evidence in
this respect has been adduced before the Court and the petitioner has examined as many as 4
witnesses including the petitioner and all have equivocally supported the fact that during the poll-
ing, the voters were being carried on payment of money and the work was delegated to few per-
sons. He went through to the statements of petitioner Rupdhar Pudo and 3 witnesses namely Arjun
Singh Thakur (P.W.2), Santosh Yadav(P.W.3) and Rajesh Kumar Pudo (P.W.4) and submitted that
all the videos were also recorded and the complaint was also made to the Election Commission.
Therefore, the petitioner has placed all the evidence on record to show that corrupt practice was
adopted by respondent No. 1 Bhojraj Nag by payment of money and by other allurements to the
voters. Therefore it would be termed as corrupt practice and the election of respondent no. 1 be set
aside.
6.
Per contra, Shri Ramakant Mishra, learned counsel appearing for repondent No. 1 would submit that the
pleadings in the petition are completely vague and no primary evidence has been adduced by the respondent
it is further submitted that though the reference of one O.P. Gupta, has been made but no efforts were made
to call and examine him as a witness. He further submitted that mere pleading of fact that the other candi-
dates who were contesting the election have withdrawn their candidatures, will not prove the fact that
money was paid by the returned candidate. He further submitted that no pleading has been made and despite
the fact that it is stated that occurrence of incidents was captured in camera, no evidence has been led in this
behalf. Therefore, the petition is devoid of merits and deserves to be dismissed at the threshold.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1932
7.
On the basis of pleadings of the parties, this Court has framed the following issues on 19.02.2016.
S. No.
Issues
Findings
1.
Whether the respondent No. 1, (returned candidate) exercised
“Not proved”
undue influence, threat and Pressure and if so whether it
amounts to commission of corrupt practices ?
2.
Whether the respondent No. 1 (returned candidate) had offe-
“Not proved”
red free food and other articles to the electors to influence
the electors to vote for him, therefore, it amounts to corrupt
Practices ?
3.
Whether the election of Respondent No. 1 (returned candi-
No
date is liable to be set aside) ?
8.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record and documents filed along-
with the petition as well as the evidence adduced during the counsel of trial.
9.
After closure of the trial, on the last day of closure of arguments of respondents, an applicant has been filed
by one Shri Pankaj Mahawar u/s 151 of CPC read with Order 1 Rule 10(2) to implead the applicant Pankaj
Mahawar as a party in the case Along-with the petition certain documents have also been placed and the
allegations have been made that the petitioner was not able to bring evidence properly before the Court and
therefore he may be allowed to be impleaded as a party. The said argument was vehemently opposed by the
petitioner and the respondent and submits that the applicant Pankaj Mahawar has neither any locus-standi
nor has any interest instead he is trying to protract the trial and the effort is to keep this petition pending.
The counsel for the petitioner further refutes the allegation that the case was not contested properly. It is
contended that the like nautre of allegation at the closure of case casts a stigma on the petitioner, therefore
the application be dismissed with heavy cost.
10.
Section 81 of the Representation of People’s Act 1951 says that the election petition may be presented on
the grounds enumerated u/ss 100 and 101 by any candidate on the elector of concerned constituency within
45 days. The document which has been filed along-with the application by the applicant Pankaj Mahawar
would show that the applicant is resident of Gujrati Colony, Dhamtari, Tahsil and District Dhamtari there-
fore, apparently as appears he is not an elector/voter of the Antagarh constituency. Along-with the appliaction,
the order sheets of 2015 have been placed on record which would show that the applicant was also in know
of the fact that the election petition is pending before this Court. The word elector has been defined in the
Act of 1951 that person to vote at the election to which the election petition relates. The election petition is
of Antagarh constituencey therefore, applicant even remotely can be considered within the definition of
elector. The documents e. order sheets of this petition suggest that the applicant was aware of the fact that
the case was pending since 2015. At the fag end when the final argument of the respondents were in con-
cluding stage, the said application has been filed with an averment that the petitioner was unable to place
the evidence which was existing in the case.
11.
I an afraid that if such like nature of third party’s application is allowed to intervene in such a manner then
the entire object of section 81 of the R.P. Act 1951 would be defeated. At the same time the applicant cannot
claim himself to be the repository of the entire wisdom and casts stigma on the petitioner especially when
the petitioner was also a candidate who contested the election and having lost the election, has filed the
election petition before the High Court to set aside the election of the returned candidate on the grounds of
undue infulence and corrupt practice. As such the said application appears to have been filed with an
oblique motive and to protract the trail of election petition or to keep it alive for some reason or the other. In
the result, on overall evaluating the facts, I am of the opinion that the said application is devoid of merits
and is liable to be rejected.
12.
The record would show that the petitioner has examined himself as P.W. 1 and one Arjun Singh Thakur has
been examined as P.W. 2, Santosh Yadav has been examined as P.W. 3, Rajesh Kumar Pudo has been
examined as P.W. 4 whereas the respondent no. 1 has examined himself alone.
13.
Section 100 (1) (b) lays down that the /commission of corrupt Practice is a ground for declaring the election
veid in this context, Section 100 (1) (b) (d) is relevant here and quoted below.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1933
Section 100 of the R.P Act. 1951.
100 Grounds for delcaring election to be void -(1) Subject to the provisions of such sub-section (2) if the
High Court is of the opinion:—
1.
(a)
xxx
xxx
xxx
(b)
that any corrupt practice has been committed by a returned candidate or his election agent
or by any other person with the consent of a returned candidate or his election agent; or
(c)
xxx
xxx
xxx
(d)
that the result of the election, in so far as it concerns a returned candidate, has been materally
effected—
(i)
xxx
xxx
(ii)
by any corrupt practice committed in the interests of the returned candidate by
an agent other than his election agent or.
(iii)
xxx
xxx
(iv)
by any non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution or of this Act or
of any rules or orders made under this Act,
The High Court shall declare the election of the returned candidate to be void.”
14.
Further coming back to the point of pleading, reading of Section 83 would show that where an election
petition alleges commission of corrupt practice by a candidate, the pleading must contain (a) direct and
detailed nature of corrupt practice as defined in 1951 Act; (b) the details of every important particulars
giving the time, place, names of persons, use of words and expressions, etc. it must also clearly appear from
the allegations that the corrupt practice was indulged with either express or implied consent of the candidate
or his election agent.
15.
In the present case, with respect to issue no. 1 whether the retrned candidate has exercised undue influence
threat and pressure to pressurize the withdrawal of his opponent candidates, the respective pleadings made
by the petitioner was perused. At Para 8.8 of the petition, the pleading has been made that one Om Prakash
Gupta had given a call to him by his mobile number and offered money for withdawal of candidature and
tried to allure, influence and pressurize the petitioner, in the pleading and avidence of the pititoner it is
stated that on Mobile No. 9406466221 he had received the call from one Om Prakash Gupta. In the pleading
though it has been stated that apart from allurement, influence pressure was exerted, but in the statement
nothing particulars have been described. Only omni-bus averments have been made and in the evidence it is
stated that in lieu of withdrawal of his candidature, he was offered whatever he would have asked that would
be fulfilled. It has also not been made clear that how much amount was offered and what sort of pressure
was exerted. Though a particular mobile phone number has been stated, but no evidence is adduced or on
record to show that to whom the said number belonged. The evidence is furhter absent to show that whether
the phone number which received the call, whether it was of the petitioner or any of the other persons. It is
also not clear that what was the identity of the alleged caller O.P.Gupta. If the petitioner who was also a
contesting candidate had received such phone call, the best evidence to prove the call details could have
been placed on record along-with the identity of the caller. Nothing has been placed on record to show that
when it was called, what was the timing, who was the caller and his identity.
16.
The petitioner though claimed that the receiving number belonged to him but that too has not been estab-
lished. Only paid oral staement has been adduced about the call. The official records to prove the identity of
receiver and caller could have been proved by evidence, but the same was withheld by the petitioner.
Despite the best evidence available to the petitioner, the petitioner has chosen not to place it on record.
Only by mere submission that the petitioner was offered money and allured for withdrawal of candidatures,
no inference can be drawn in absence of proof beyond doubt. Further more, the statement of petitioner in
this regard would show that it was the opinion and inference of the petitioner that the other candidates
barring respondents have received the money for withdrawal. If the petitioner was so sanguine of the fact
that the money was offered to other 11 candidates then in order to prove the facts and denial any one could
have been summoned as a witness. Therefore, the opinion of the petitioner cannot take place of evidence to
prove the facts.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1934
17.
Further in evidence the petitioner had given a specific date of call, it was stated by the petitioner that on
29.08.2014 one Johan Gawade, who was the ex-president of Durg kondal and one Narendra Besre, who was
one of the worker of the Bjp, contacted the petitioner on his mobile and asked the petitoner to meet and
thereafter it was suggested to the petitioner to take back his name as condidate. It is further stated that in
lieu of withdrawal of names of Jagannath Sahu, Anil Chandel and Narendra Besre offer was made to pay
heavy amounts. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that one Manturam Pawar who was authorised
candidate of Congress Party, had also taken back his name.
18.
So again inference has been made that respondent had paid different amounts to the contesting candidates
and the other candidates have withdrawn their names to contest the election after acceptance of such money.
However, except the inference nothings on record to come to a definite finding. Despite the fact that specific
date has been given that on 29.08.2014 the petitioner had received the phone call from Johan Gawade and
Narendra Besare, the call details which could have been placed on record as a proof of a positive call on a
particular date has not been produced. Therefore, even if the conversation was not recorded in order to draw
a little inference, the petitoner could have produced the call details along with the identity of caller and
phone number to show that he received certain phonecalls from a particular person on a particular date, So
the minimum evidence too is completely absent. There is no reason assigned by the petitioner that why such
evidence was withheld, which would have been otherwise available so as to climb even the first ladder of
evidence.
19.
The statement would further show that the petitoner has stated that on 30.08.2014 while he was with Arjun
Singh Thakur at his residence, he received a phone call on his mobile number. The Mobile number is again
stated to be 9406466221. There is no evidence on record to show that the said mobile number belonges to
the petitioner,. Furhter the statement is made that similar phone call was received by Arjun Singh Thakur
and Narendra Bansod, who were the post holders in the party from which the petitioner was contesting.
Arjun Singh Thakur has been exmined as PW-2. He has stated that he was holding the mobile no. 9406371295.
it is stated that the Secretary of Chief Minister, Raman Singh had called him disclosing his identity as Om
Prakash and he was aksed to advice Rupdhar Pudo to take back the name and in lieu thereof money was
offered. Neither the evidence thereof has been produced nor any document has been placed to show with
reference to the phone number that it belongs to him. Similar analogy also applied here that when the details
of particular date and the mobile number was given by the witness of the petitioner, then in such case, the
petitioner could have placed on record the minimum fact that the said number belongs to Arjun Singh.
Thakur (PW 2), who had recevied the alleged phone call. The caller identity could have been proved by the
record, but nothing has been placed on record. In the cross-examination the witness has referred the hearsay
conversation with Rupdhar Pudo about receipt of the phone call, which too is not admissible in evidence.
20.
Arjun Singh Thakur (PW-2) has further stated the petitioner had made complaint to the Chief Election
Officer but the same fact is not stated by the petitioner. No document is also placed on record to show that
the offer was made to the petitioner Rupdhar Pudo and party workers have complained to the Election
Officer. In the statement, the furhter reference is also made to one Narendra Bansod, who was shown as
National Secretary of Ambedkarite Party. It was stated that he also received phone call, whereby the offer
was made to take back the candidature in lieu of the money. The said Narendra Bansod has not been
examined before the Court, it is not clear that why his evidence was withheld when he was also availabel as
a primary witness and could have disclosed the facts with respect to the allegations made by the petitioner,
therefore, the evidence that the petitioner and the witness PW-2 have deposed about the offer made for
withdrawal of candidature, in both the statements though the specific phone number with particular timing
has been stated, but nothing has been placed on record to show and prove that the recipients of the number
were the witnesses i.e. the petitioner and PW.-2. In absence of reliable evidence of the petitioner who was in
the hold of such evidence to show his dentity of holding a particular number the adverse inference would
follow that he has withheld the evidence himself, therefore, only on the basis of bald statement the facts
cannot be accepted as a gospel truth that he had received the phone call with offer of money to withdraw the
candidature.
21.
The degree of proof as required man election petition has been laid down by the Supreme Court in a case
law reported in (1995) 5 SCC 347-Gajanan Krishnaji Bapat vs. Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe wherein Their
Lordship held that “in order to unseat a returned candidate the crrupt practice must be specifically alleged
ard strictly proved to have been committted by the returned candidate, himself or by his election agent or by
any other person with the consent of the returned candidate or by his election agent. The suspicion however
strong cannot take the place of proof, whether the allegations are sought to be established by direct evidence
or by circumstantial evidence. Since pleadings play an important role in an election petition, the legislature
has provided that the allegations of corrupt practice must be properly alleged and both the material facts and
particulars provided in the petition itself so as to disclose a complete cause of action.”
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1935
22.
With respect to undue influence and corrupt practice nothing is pleaded that the named person Omprakash
Gupta was acting on behalf of the respondent or he was acting on behalf of any other candidate. Only by
making reference that offer was made to withdraw the candidatures, it cannot be conclusively proved that
Omprakash Gupta was acting on behalf of the respondent.
23.
with respect to pleading of undue influence, the petitioner has failed to furnish concise material practiculars
as to in what manner the undue influence was exercised. On reading of Section 83 of the Act, 1951 it shows
that substantive part of Section 83 consists of three improtant elements namely the election petition should
contain concise statement of material fact which the election petitioner relied upon. The emphasis is on the
material facts which should be stated in the concise form. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Charan Lal
Sahu Vs. Giani Jail Singh (1984) 1 SCC 390 while considering the “undue influence” as enumerated in
Section 18(1), emphasizing the need of precise, specific and unambiguous pleading of corrupt practice
particularly with reference to undue influence held thus :—
“Therefore, in order that the offence of undue influence can be said to have been made out within
the meaning of Section 171-C of the Penal Code, something more than the mere act of canvassing for a
candidate must be shown to have been done by the offender. That something more may, for example, be in
the nature of a threat of an injury to a candidate or a voter as stated in sub-section (2) (a) of Section 171-C
of the Penal Code or, it may consist of inducing a belief of Divine displeasure in the mind of a candidate or
a voter as stated in sub-section (2) (b). The act alleged as constituting undue influence must be in the nature
of a pressure or tyranny on the mind of the candidate or the voter it is not possible to enumerate exhaustively
the divers categories of acts which fall within the definition of undue influence it is enough for our purpose
to say, that of one thing there can be no doubt; The mere act of canvassing for a candidate cannot amount to
undue influence within the meaning of Section 171-C of the Penal Code.”
24.
The Supreme Court in case of Krishnamoorthy V. Sivakumar (2015) 3 SCC 467 has reiterated the law laid
down in Aad Lal v. Kanshi Ram 1980 (2) SCC 350 with respect to degree of pleading and proof of undue
infuence. Para 55 of the decision rendered in Krishnamoorthy v. Sivakumar (Supra) is relevant here and
quoted below ;
55
In Aad Lal v. Kanshi Ram, while deliberating on undue influence as enshrined under section
123(2) of the 1951 Act, it has been held thus: (SCC pp 353-54, para 11).
“11.
it has to be remembered that it is an essential ingredient of the corrupt practice of “undue
influence” under sub-section (2) of Section 123 of the Act, that there should be any direct or
indirect interference or attempt to interfere’ on the part of the candidate or his age, or of any other
person with the consent of the candidate or his agent, with the free exercise of any electoral right.
Therre are two provisios to the sub-section, but they are obviously not applicable to the contro-
versy before us. It was therefore, necessary, for the purpose of establishing the corrupt practice of
“undue influence”, to prove that there was any direct or indirect interference or attempt to interfere
with the exercise of any electoral right.
(Emphasis supplied)
25.
With respect to undue influence, the principles have been explained in (2015) 3 SCC Para, 58 which
reads thus :
58.
From the aforesaid authorities, the following principles can be culled out;
58.1
The words “undue influence” are not to be understood or conferred a meaning in the context of
“English Statutes”
58.2
The Indian election law pays regard to the use of such influence having the tendency to bring about
the result that has been contemplated in the clause.
58.3
If an act which is calculated to interfere with the free exercise of electoral right, is the true and effe-
ctive test whether or not a candidate is quilty of undue influence.
58.4
The word “direct or indirect” used in the provision have their significance and they are to be
applied bearing in mind the factual context.
58.5
Canvassing by a Minister or an issue of a whip in the from of a request is permissible unless there
is compulsion on the electorate to vote in the manner indicated.
58.6
The structure of the provisions contained in Section 171-C IPC are to be kept in view while appre-
ciating the expression “undue influence” used in Section 123(2) of the 1951 Act.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1936
58.7
The two provisos added to Section 123(2) do not take away the effect of the principal or main
provision.
58.8
Freedom in the exercise of the judgment which engulfs a voters right a free choice, in selecting
the candidate whom he believes to be best fitted to represent the constituency, has to be given
due weightage.
58.9
There should never be tyranny over the mind which would put fetters and scuttle the free exericse
of an electorate.
58.10
The concept of undue influence applies at both the stages, namely, pre-voting and at the time of
casting of vote.
58.11
“undue influence” is not to be equated with “proper influence” and, therefore, legitimate
canvassing is permissible in a democratic set up.
58.12
Free exrcise of electoral right has a nexus with direct or indirect interference or attempt to
interfere.”
26.
In the instant petition, it would reveal that though different names have been stated by the petitioner but
nowhere the returned candidate has been named to be instrumental in such allurement for withdrawal. The
evidence is completely blurred and ambiguous because the fact that the persons who have been named and
at whose behalf they were working has not been clearly stated. The identity of the said callers who rang up
to different associates of the petitioner is also not clear. The associates of the petitioner who received the
Phone calls have also not come up in evidence and one of the witnesses e., P.W.2 has given shaky evidence
which also do not substantiate any fact, therefore, in absence of such evidence when the proof is required to
be akin to the evidence like a cirminal case no presumption can be drawn Consequently, after evaluating the
entire evidence with respect to the offer made by phone calls, the same has not been established by accept-
able cogent evidence which may lead to show that undue influece was exercised. In the result, it is held that
the petitoner has failed to bring any evidence on record that the returned candidate has exrcised undue
influence threat or pressure for withdrawal of the candidature of petitoner as also the other contesting
candidates. Accordingly, the finding to issue no. 1 s answered in negative i.e., “as not proved”.
27.
Now with respect to issue No. 2 that “whether the respondent No. 1 (returned candidate) had offered free
food and other articles to the electors to influence the electors to vote for him”. the respective pleading and
evidence is examined. At paras 8.11 to 8.14 the petitioner has made different pleadings in this regard. The
reading of petition would show that it is stated that the pettioner visited different polling booths along-with
Arjun Singh Thakur, Rajesh Kumar Pudo, Shri Santosh Yadav and Shri Pankaj Sarkar. They saw that the
voters were brought to the polling booths in transport vehicle bearing No. C.G. 19T 0841 driven by one
vikas Gaine and in another vehicle bearing No. C.G. 04ZD-7891 Dirven by one Asim Das. It has also been
stated that the food articles were also given to the different voters. A perusal of statements of Rupdhar Pudo,
the petitioner; Arjun Singh (P.W.2), Shri Santosh Yadav (P.W.3) and Rajesh Kumar Pudo (P.W. 4) would
show that similar statements have been made. The drivers of the vehicles who have been named as Vikas
Gaine or Asim Das have not been examined. Even they were not summoped. Reading of the statements
would show that the witnesses have deposed that having asked the drivers, they have disclosed that the
voters were being brought at the instance of Bhoj Raj Nag, the returned candidate, and Rs. 200/- was paid
for each voters Except the oral evidence no other supporting evidence in support of fact has been placed on
record. Another person who disclosed the fact is named as Uttam Das. Uttam Das was said to be the worker
of Bjp. He has also not been examined.
28.
Therefore the evidence which has been adduced by witnesses P.W. 1 to P.W. 4 are in similar line that having
aksed the drivers of the vehicles, they discolsed the fact that they had brought the voters at the instance of
the returned candidate is only hearsay. The petitioner did not make any effort even to call for the witnesses
so as to make enlightenment of facts. The said statements are not direct and they contain only bald allega-
tions which have been denied by the respondent No. 1 flatly, therefore, in order to prove the fact that the
voters were being carried at the instance of respondent/returned candidate., it is presumptive to attach the
liability with the returned candidate and such presumption cannot be drawn in an election petition.
29.
Furhter more it is stated that near the voting booths within 100 meters foods were distributed and having
asked it was disclosed that it was at the instance of Bhojraj Nag. Likewise statements have been made by
witnesses P.W. 1 to P.W. 4. The statemnts would show that carryign of voters and the distrubtion of food
were recorded in the video camera and mobile by the witnesses. No evidence has been placed about such
electornic evidence. The petitioner has stated that no complaint was made about the bringing or carrying
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1937
the voters by vehicle at Booth No. 18 either to the election and proof there of would be not preponderance
of probabilities as in Civil action but proof beyond reasonable doubt as in criminal trials”.
16.
The above decision has been followed in MercyKutty Amma v. Kadavoor Sivadasan (2004) 2 SCC
217, vide SCC vide SCC pp 225-26 para 27 where it was abserved;
“27.
Allegations of corrupt practices are quasi-criminal charges and the proof that would be
required in the support thereof would be as in a criminal charge. The charges of corrupt
partices are to be equated with crimianl charges and proof thereof would be not preponde-
rance of probabilities as in civil action but proof beyond reasonable doubt as in a crimianl
trial.”
17.
A basic principle in the law relating to elections and election petitions is that the mandate of the
people as expressed in the electionresults should ordinarily be respected by courts, and the election
of a successful candidate should not be lightly set aside, vide R.P. Moidutty v. P.T. Kunju Mohammad
(2000) 1 SCC 481 vide SCC pp. 488-89, para 14, where it was observed.
“14.
It is a basic to the law of elections and election petitions that in a democracy, the mandate
of the people as expressed at the hustings must prevail and be respected by the courts and
that is why the election of a successful candidate is not to be set aside lightly. A heavy
onus ies on the election petitioner seeking setting aside of the election of a successful
candidate to make out a clear case for such relief both in the pleadings and at the trial. The
mandateof the people is one as has been truly, freely and purely expressed. The electoral
process in a democracy such as ours is too sacrosanct to be permitted to be polluted
by coruupt practices. If the court arrive at a finding of commission of corrupt practice by
a returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of a
returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of a
returned condidate or his election agent then the election of the returned candidate shall
be declared to be void. The underlying principle is that corrupt practice having been
committed, the result of the election does not echo the true voice of the people. As a
consequences flowing from the proof of corrupt practice at the election are serious, the
onus of establishing commission of corrupt practice lies heavily on the person who alleges
the same. The onus of proof is not discharged merely on preponderance of probabilities,
the standard of proof required is akin to that of proving a criminal or quasi-criminal
charge. Clear cut evidence, wholly credible and reliable, is needed to prove beyond doubt
the charge of corrupt practice.”
18.
The same view has been taken by this Court in Mahant Shreo Nath v. Choudhary Ranbir
Singh (1970) 3 SCC 647, SCC at p. 649 para 4; Manphul Singh v. Surinder sing (1973) 2
SCC 599, SCC at p 608 para 13, Rahim Khan v. Kursid Ahmed (1974) 2 SCC 660, SCC at
p. 666, para 9, Bir Chandra Barman vl. Anil Sarkar (1976) 3 SCC 88, SCC at p 91, para 5.
Lakshmi Raman Acharya v. Chandan Singh (1977) 1 SCC 423, SCC at p. 424, para 2; Amolak-
chand Chhazed v. Bhagwandas Arya SCC at p. 573 (1977) 3 SCC 566, SCC at p. 573, para
13.”
32.
Similar view was also taken in Anvar P.V. Vs. P.K. Basheer and others (2014) 10 SCC 473 wherein it was
held that the corrupt practice is substantially akin to the criminal charges and has held as under.
“39.
It is now the settled law that a charge of corrupt practice is substantially akin to a criminal charge.
A two judge bench of this Court while dealing with the said issue in Razik Ram v. Jaswant
Singh Chouhan (1975) 4 SCC 769 held as follows (SCC p. 776 para 15);
“15.
The same evidence which may be sufficient to regard a fact as proved in a civil suit, may
be considered insufficient for a conviction in a criminal action. While in the former, a
mere preponderance of probability may constitute an adequate basis of decision, in the
latter a far higher degree of assurance and judicial certitude is requisite for a conviction.
The same is largely true about proof of a charge of corrupt practice, which cannot be
established by mere balance of probabilities, and, if, after giving due consideration and
effect to the totality of the evidence and circumstances of the case, the mind of the Court
is left rocking with reasonable doubt-not being the doubt of a timid, fickle or vacillating
mind-as to the veracity of the charge, it must hold the same as not proved.”
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1938
33.
The same view was followed by the Supereme Court in P.C. Thomas v. P.M. ismail (2009) 10 SCC 239
wherein it was held thus;
“42.
As regards, the decision of this Court in Razik Ram and other decisions on the issue, relied upon on
on behalf of the appellant, there is no quarrel with the legal position that the charge of corrupt
practice is to be equated with criminal charge and the proof required in support thereof would be as
in a criminal charge and not preponderance of probabilities, as in a civil action but proof beyond
reasonable doubt. It is well settled that it after balancing the evidence adduced there still remains
little boubt in proving the charge, its benefit must go to the returned candidate. However, it is
equally well settled that while insisting upon the statndard of proof beyond a resonable doubt, the
courts are not required to extend or stretch the doctrine to such an extreme extent as to make it
well-nigh impossible to prove any allegation of corrupt practice. Such an approach would defeat
and frustrate the very laudable and sacrosanct object of the Act in maintaining purity of the
electoralprocess, (See 5. Harcharan Singh v. S. Sajjan Singh (1985) 1 SCC 370.”
34.
Thus having regard to the pleadings and evidence on record, this Court is of the opinion that neither the
petitioner is able to prove the undue influence that the respondent or his associates have offered any amount
for withdrawal of the candidature to the petitioner by any acceptable cogent evidence and the evidence
which is on record do not substantiate the facts that the money was offered for withdrawal of the candida-
ture.
35.
Further the evidence of bringing the voters to the polling booth as a also supplying them food has neither
been proved by any acceptable evidence except the oral bald averments. The incidents though were stated to
have been captured by videography, but the same is not placed on record. The alleged complaint made to the
officials about the same incidents i.e., distribution of food and brining of the voters to the polling booths has
also not been placed on record. Therefore, no reliable evidence has been placed on record to show that it
was at the behest of returned candidate and the voters were influenced to exercise their free choice by such
offering. As a result, the petitioner has failed to bring the evidence in view of the law laid down by the
Supreme Court (Supra).
36.
As a result, the election petiton is table to be and is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
GOUTAM BHADURI
JUDGE.
•ÊŒ‡Ê ‚,
„USÃÊ./-
(Ÿ⁄‘Uãº˝ ŸÊ. ’È≈UÊÁ‹ÿÊ)
¬˝äÊÊŸ ‚Áøfl,
÷Ê⁄Uà ÁŸflʸøŸ •Êÿʪ.
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi-110001
New Delhi, dated 13th March, 2018—22 Phalguna, 1939 (Saka)
No. 82/CG-LA/(16/2014)/2018.—In pursuance of Section 106 (b) of the Representation of the People Act,
1951 (43 of 1951), the Election Commission hereby publishes Judgement dated the 8th December, 2017 of the High
Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur in Election Petition No. 16 of 2014.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1939
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
EP No. 16 of 2014
PETITIONER
:
Rupdhar Pudo S/o Jalluram Pudo Aged About 30 years R/o Village-Dargarh, P.O.
Sadhu-Michgaon, Tah Durgukondal, P.S. Kodeknurse, Distt. Kanker C.G., Pin-
494669.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS :
1.
Bhojraj Nag S/o Laxminath Nag Aged About 42 Yeas R/o Village-Himoda, P.O.
P.S. & Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker, C.G.
2.
Manturam Pawar S/o Subran Singh Pawar Aged About 47 years R/o Pakhanjur
P.O. And P.S. Pakhanjur, Tah. Pakhanjur, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
3.
Jaiprakash Padmakar Padda S/o M.R. Padmakar Padda Aged About 30 Years R/o
Gawdepara, Ward No. 15, P.O. & P.S. Bhanupratappur, Tah. Bhanupratappur,
Distt. Uttar Bastar, Kanker C.G.
4.
Anil Netam S/o Daniram Netam Aged About 38 Yeas R/o Chikhli, P.O. Useli,
Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar, Kanker C.G.
5.
Bhim Singh Usendi S/o Mayaram Usendi Aged Acbout 36 years R/o Bade Jaitpur,
Post Office-Kamta, P.S. And Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
6.
Devnath Hidko S/o Sunher Hidko Aged About 27 years R/o Pufgaon, P.O. &
P.S. Antagarh, Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar, Kanker C.G.
7.
Mahadev Mandavi S/o Vishalram Mandavi Aged about 27 Years R/o Koilibeda
Chandni Chowk, P.O. And P.S. Koilibeda, Tah. Pakhanjur Distt. Uttar Bastar
Kanker
C.G.
8.
Parsuram Pawar S/o Jagoram Pawar Aged About 44 Years R/o Belgal Sitlapara,
P.O. Tekameta, P.S. Bande, Tah. Pakhanjur, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
9.
Raghunath Kumeti S/o Late Samrath Kumeti Aged About 42 Years R/o Tenkal
Patelpara, House No. 26 P.O. And P.S. Antagarh, Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar
Bastar Kanker C.G.
10.
Savita Pawar W/o Manturam Pawar Aged About 35 Years R/o Pakhanjur P.O.
And P.S. Pakhanjur, Tah. Pakhanjur, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
11.
Shankarlal Netam S/o Late Sukhlal Netam Aged About 25 Years R/o imlipadar,
P.O. and P.S. Antagarh, Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
12.
Virendra Kumar Hidami S/o Sagruram Hidami Aged About 25 Years R/o Sarandi
Uparpara, P.O. Sarandi, P.S. And Tah. Antagarh, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker C.G.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1940
For the Petitoner
:
Mr. Sudeep Verma Advocate
For the Respondent No. 1 :
Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Advocate
For the intervener
:
Mr. Himanshu Kr. Sharma, Adv.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri
C. A. V. JUDGMENT
Judgment reserved on 15.11.2017
Judgment delivered on 08.12.2017
1.
The primary relief sought in this petition is to declare the election of returned candidate Bhojraj Nag who
was declared elected in the by-election of Chhattisgarh State Legislative Assembly Area No. 79 of Antagarh
Constituency as held on 13.09.2014.
2.
The instant petition is under Sections 80 & 80-A read with section 81 of the Representation of the People
Act., 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1951). The grounds which are urged in this petition are that
respondent No. 1 has resorted to corrupt practice thereby the result of election is liable to be set aside.
3.
The brief facts of the case are that initially in the year 2013, the general election to the Antagarh Legislative
Assembly was conducted by the Election Commission. The present election petition is concerned with the
result of by-election of Legislative Assembly Area no. 79 of Antagarh Constituency held on 13.09.2014.
After the initial election of 2013, the returned candidate who was elected in the year 2013 had vacated the
seat therefore new notification for election was issued. The election Commission thereafter issued notifica-
tion on 20.08.2014 to conduct by-election for the Antagarh Constituency and the following dates were fixed
for conducting the election.
S. No.
Event
Date
1.
Issue of notification
20-08-2014
2.
Last date for filling nominations
27-08-2014
3.
Scrutiny of nominations
28-08-2014
4.
Last date for withdrawal of candidatures
30-08-2014
5.
Date of Polling
13-09-2014
6.
Counting of votes
16-09-2014
7.
Date before which the election shall be completed
19-09-2014
4.
After the result of polling, respondent no. 1 was declared as returned candidate.
5.
(i)
Mr. Sudeep Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that as per
the election programme, the last date of withdrawal of candidature was on 30-08-2014 and out of
13 candidates who had filled their nominations, 11 had withdrawn their candidature. The petitoner
belongs to ambedkarite Party of India and the repondent returned candidat belongs to Bhartiya
Janta Party. It is stated that in order to pressurize withdrawal of the candidates who were 11 in
number undue influence and pressure tactics were adopted by the respondent returned candidate. It
is stated that the petitioner was also approached and request was made to him for withdrawal of his
candidature through mobile of one Omprakash Gupta and money was offered but the petitioner did
not accept the same.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1941
(ii)
It is further stated that during such conversation it was also disclosed that the candidature of Indian
National Congress has withdrawn his candidature by use of undue influence and by payment of
money, therefore, the corrupt practice was adopted by the respondent it is furhter submitted that
the petitioner had visited various polling booths on the date of polling on 13.09.2014 and it was
found that different voters were carried to the polling booths in different vehicles, It was stated that
having enquired, it was revealed that the voters were being brought to the polling stations at the
behest of respondent no. 1 and in lieu of thereof amount was paid by respondent no. 1 therefore the
same also amounts to corrupt practice. Further, it is submitted that free supply of fruits was made
to the voters apart from various means of conveyance used to carry the voters to the polling booths.
(iii)
Referring to the pleadings and statements, learned counsel would submit that the oral evidence in
this respect has been adduced before the Court and the petitioner has examined as many as 4
witnesses including the petitioner and all have equivocally supported the fact that during the poll-
ing, the voters were being carried on payment of money and the work was delegated to few per-
sons. He went through to the statements of petitioner Rupdhar Pudo and 3 witnesses namely Arjun
Singh Thakur (P.W.2), Santosh Yadav(P.W.3) and Rajesh Kumar Pudo (P.W.4) and submitted that
all the videos were also recorded and the complaint was also made to the Election Commission.
Therefore, the petitioner has placed all the evidence on record to show that corrupt practice was
adopted by respondent No. 1 Bhojraj Nag by payment of money and by other allurements to the
voters. Therefore it would be termed as corrupt practice and the election of respondent no. 1 be set
aside.
6.
Per contra, Shri Ramakant Mishra, learned counsel appearing for repondent No. 1 would submit that the
pleadings in the petition are completely vague and no primary evidence has been adduced by the respondent
it is further submitted that though the reference of one O.P. Gupta, has been made but no efforts were made
to call and examine him as a witness. He further submitted that mere pleading of fact that the other candi-
dates who were contesting the election have withdrawn their candidatures, will not prove the fact that
money was paid by the returned candidate. He further submitted that no pleading has been made and despite
the fact that it is stated that occurrence of incidents was captured in camera, no evidence has been led in this
behalf. Therefore, the petition is devoid of merits and deserves to be dismissed at the threshold.
7.
On the basis of pleadings of the parties, this Court has framed the following issues on 19.02.2016.
S. No.
Issues
Findings
1.
Whether the respondent No. 1, (returned candidate) exercised
“Not proved”
undue influence, threat and Pressure and if so whether it
amounts to commission of corrupt practices ?
2.
Whether the respondent No. 1 (returned candidate) had offe-
“Not proved”
red free food and other articles to the electors to influence
the electors to vote for him, therefore, it amounts to corrupt
Practices ?
3.
Whether the election of Respondent No. 1 (returned candi-
No
date is liable to be set aside) ?
8.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record and documents filed along-
with the petition as well as the evidence adduced during the counsel of trial.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1942
9.
After closure of the trial, on the last day of closure of arguments of respondents, an applicant has been filed
by one Shri Pankaj Mahawar u/s 151 of CPC read with Order 1 Rule 10(2) to implead the applicant Pankaj
Mahawar as a party in the case Along-with the petition certain documents have also been placed and the
allegations have been made that the petitioner was not able to bring evidence properly before the Court and
therefore he may be allowed to be impleaded as a party. The said argument was vehemently opposed by the
petitioner and the respondent and submits that the applicant Pankaj Mahawar has neither any locus-standi
nor has any interest instead he is trying to protract the trial and the effort is to keep this petition pending.
The counsel for the petitioner further refutes the allegation that the case was not contested properly. It is
contended that the like nautre of allegation at the closure of case casts a stigma on the petitioner, therefore
the application be dismissed with heavy cost.
10.
Section 81 of the Representation of People’s Act 1951 says that the election petition may be presented on
the grounds enumerated u/ss 100 and 101 by any candidate on the elector of concerned constituency within
45 days. The document which has been filed along-with the application by the applicant Pankaj Mahawar
would show that the applicant is resident of Gujrati Colony, Dhamtari, Tahsil and District Dhamtari there-
fore, apparently as appears he is not an elector/voter of the Antagarh constituency. Along-with the appliaction,
the order sheets of 2015 have been placed on record which would show that the applicant was also in know
of the fact that the election petition is pending before this Court. The word elector has been defined in the
Act of 1951 that person to vote at the election to which the election petition relates. The election petition is
of Antagarh constituencey therefore, applicant even remotely can be considered within the definition of
elector. The documents e. order sheets of this petition suggest that the applicant was aware of the fact that
the case was pending since 2015. At the fag end when the final argument of the respondents were in con-
cluding stage, the said application has been filed with an averment that the petitioner was unable to place
the evidence which was existing in the case.
11.
I an afraid that if such like nature of third party’s application is allowed to intervene in such a manner then
the entire object of section 81 of the R.P. Act 1951 would be defeated. At the same time the applicant cannot
claim himself to be the repository of the entire wisdom and casts stigma on the petitioner especially when
the petitioner was also a candidate who contested the election and having lost the election, has filed the
election petition before the High Court to set aside the election of the returned candidate on the grounds of
undue infulence and corrupt practice. As such the said application appears to have been filed with an
oblique motive and to protract the trail of election petition or to keep it alive for some reason or the other. In
the result, on overall evaluating the facts, I am of the opinion that the said application is devoid of merits
and is liable to be rejected.
12.
The record would show that the petitioner has examined himself as P.W. 1 and one Arjun Singh Thakur has
been examined as P.W. 2, Santosh Yadav has been examined as P.W. 3, Rajesh Kumar Pudo has been
examined as P.W. 4 whereas the respondent no. 1 has examined himself alone.
13.
Section 100 (1) (b) lays down that the /commission of corrupt Practice is a ground for declaring the election
veid in this context, Section 100 (1) (b) (d) is relevant here and quoted below.
Section 100 of the R.P Act. 1951.
100 Grounds for delcaring election to be void -(1) Subject to the provisions of such sub-section (2) if the
High Court is of the opinion:—
1.
(a)
xxx
xxx
xxx
(b)
that any corrupt practice has been committed by a returned candidate or his election agent
or by any other person with the consent of a returned candidate or his election agent; or
(c)
xxx
xxx
xxx
(d)
that the result of the election, in so far as it concerns a returned candidate, has been materally
effected—
(i)
xxx
xxx
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1943
(ii)
by any corrupt practice committed in the interests of the returned candidate by
an agent other than his election agent or.
(iii)
xxx
xxx
(iv)
by any non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution or of this Act or
of any rules or orders made under this Act,
The High Court shall declare the election of the returned candidate to be void.”
14.
Further coming back to the point of pleading, reading of Section 83 would show that where an election
petition alleges commission of corrupt practice by a candidate, the pleading must contain (a) direct and
detailed nature of corrupt practice as defined in 1951 Act; (b) the details of every important particulars
giving the time, place, names of persons, use of words and expressions, etc. it must also clearly appear from
the allegations that the corrupt practice was indulged with either express or implied consent of the candidate
or his election agent.
15.
In the present case, with respect to issue no. 1 whether the retrned candidate has exercised undue influence
threat and pressure to pressurize the withdrawal of his opponent candidates, the respective pleadings made
by the petitioner was perused. At Para 8.8 of the petition, the pleading has been made that one Om Prakash
Gupta had given a call to him by his mobile number and offered money for withdawal of candidature and
tried to allure, influence and pressurize the petitioner, in the pleading and avidence of the pititoner it is
stated that on Mobile No. 9406466221 he had received the call from one Om Prakash Gupta. In the pleading
though it has been stated that apart from allurement, influence pressure was exerted, but in the statement
nothing particulars have been described. Only omni-bus averments have been made and in the evidence it is
stated that in lieu of withdrawal of his candidature, he was offered whatever he would have asked that would
be fulfilled. It has also not been made clear that how much amount was offered and what sort of pressure
was exerted. Though a particular mobile phone number has been stated, but no evidence is adduced or on
record to show that to whom the said number belonged. The evidence is furhter absent to show that whether
the phone number which received the call, whether it was of the petitioner or any of the other persons. It is
also not clear that what was the identity of the alleged caller O.P.Gupta. If the petitioner who was also a
contesting candidate had received such phone call, the best evidence to prove the call details could have
been placed on record along-with the identity of the caller. Nothing has been placed on record to show that
when it was called, what was the timing, who was the caller and his identity.
16.
The petitioner though claimed that the receiving number belonged to him but that too has not been estab-
lished. Only paid oral staement has been adduced about the call. The official records to prove the identity of
receiver and caller could have been proved by evidence, but the same was withheld by the petitioner.
Despite the best evidence available to the petitioner, the petitioner has chosen not to place it on record.
Only by mere submission that the petitioner was offered money and allured for withdrawal of candidatures,
no inference can be drawn in absence of proof beyond doubt. Further more, the statement of petitioner in
this regard would show that it was the opinion and inference of the petitioner that the other candidates
barring respondents have received the money for withdrawal. If the petitioner was so sanguine of the fact
that the money was offered to other 11 candidates then in order to prove the facts and denial any one could
have been summoned as a witness. Therefore, the opinion of the petitioner cannot take place of evidence to
prove the facts.
17.
Further in evidence the petitioner had given a specific date of call, it was stated by the petitioner that on
29.08.2014 one Johan Gawade, who was the ex-president of Durg kondal and one Narendra Besre, who was
one of the worker of the Bjp, contacted the petitioner on his mobile and asked the petitoner to meet and
thereafter it was suggested to the petitioner to take back his name as condidate. It is further stated that in
lieu of withdrawal of names of Jagannath Sahu, Anil Chandel and Narendra Besre offer was made to pay
heavy amounts. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that one Manturam Pawar who was authorised
candidate of Congress Party, had also taken back his name.
18.
So again inference has been made that respondent had paid different amounts to the contesting candidates
and the other candidates have withdrawn their names to contest the election after acceptance of such money.
However, except the inference nothings on record to come to a definite finding. Despite the fact that specific
date has been given that on 29.08.2014 the petitioner had received the phone call from Johan Gawade and
Narendra Besare, the call details which could have been placed on record as a proof of a positive call on a
particular date has not been produced. Therefore, even if the conversation was not recorded in order to draw
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1944
a little inference, the petitoner could have produced the call details along with the identity of caller and
phone number to show that he received certain phonecalls from a particular person on a particular date, So
the minimum evidence too is completely absent. There is no reason assigned by the petitioner that why such
evidence was withheld, which would have been otherwise available so as to climb even the first ladder of
evidence.
19.
The statement would further show that the petitoner has stated that on 30.08.2014 while he was with Arjun
Singh Thakur at his residence, he received a phone call on his mobile number. The Mobile number is again
stated to be 9406466221. There is no evidence on record to show that the said mobile number belonges to
the petitioner,. Furhter the statement is made that similar phone call was received by Arjun Singh Thakur
and Narendra Bansod, who were the post holders in the party from which the petitioner was contesting.
Arjun Singh Thakur has been exmined as PW-2. He has stated that he was holding the mobile no. 9406371295.
it is stated that the Secretary of Chief Minister, Raman Singh had called him disclosing his identity as Om
Prakash and he was aksed to advice Rupdhar Pudo to take back the name and in lieu thereof money was
offered. Neither the evidence thereof has been produced nor any document has been placed to show with
reference to the phone number that it belongs to him. Similar analogy also applied here that when the details
of particular date and the mobile number was given by the witness of the petitioner, then in such case, the
petitioner could have placed on record the minimum fact that the said number belongs to Arjun Singh.
Thakur (PW 2), who had recevied the alleged phone call. The caller identity could have been proved by the
record, but nothing has been placed on record. In the cross-examination the witness has referred the hearsay
conversation with Rupdhar Pudo about receipt of the phone call, which too is not admissible in evidence.
20.
Arjun Singh Thakur (PW-2) has further stated the petitioner had made complaint to the Chief Election
Officer but the same fact is not stated by the petitioner. No document is also placed on record to show that
the offer was made to the petitioner Rupdhar Pudo and party workers have complained to the Election
Officer. In the statement, the furhter reference is also made to one Narendra Bansod, who was shown as
National Secretary of Ambedkarite Party. It was stated that he also received phone call, whereby the offer
was made to take back the candidature in lieu of the money. The said Narendra Bansod has not been
examined before the Court, it is not clear that why his evidence was withheld when he was also availabel as
a primary witness and could have disclosed the facts with respect to the allegations made by the petitioner,
therefore, the evidence that the petitioner and the witness PW-2 have deposed about the offer made for
withdrawal of candidature, in both the statements though the specific phone number with particular timing
has been stated, but nothing has been placed on record to show and prove that the recipients of the number
were the witnesses i.e. the petitioner and PW.-2. In absence of reliable evidence of the petitioner who was in
the hold of such evidence to show his dentity of holding a particular number the adverse inference would
follow that he has withheld the evidence himself, therefore, only on the basis of bald statement the facts
cannot be accepted as a gospel truth that he had received the phone call with offer of money to withdraw the
candidature.
21.
The degree of proof as required man election petition has been laid down by the Supreme Court in a case
law reported in (1995) 5 SCC 347-Gajanan Krishnaji Bapat vs. Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe wherein Their
Lordship held that “in order to unseat a returned candidate the crrupt practice must be specifically alleged
ard strictly proved to have been committted by the returned candidate, himself or by his election agent or by
any other person with the consent of the returned candidate or by his election agent. The suspicion however
strong cannot take the place of proof, whether the allegations are sought to be established by direct evidence
or by circumstantial evidence. Since pleadings play an important role in an election petition, the legislature
has provided that the allegations of corrupt practice must be properly alleged and both the material facts and
particulars provided in the petition itself so as to disclose a complete cause of action.”
22.
With respect to undue influence and corrupt practice nothing is pleaded that the named person Omprakash
Gupta was acting on behalf of the respondent or he was acting on behalf of any other candidate. Only by
making reference that offer was made to withdraw the candidatures, it cannot be conclusively proved that
Omprakash Gupta was acting on behalf of the respondent.
23.
with respect to pleading of undue influence, the petitioner has failed to furnish concise material practiculars
as to in what manner the undue influence was exercised. On reading of Section 83 of the Act, 1951 it shows
that substantive part of Section 83 consists of three improtant elements namely the election petition should
contain concise statement of material fact which the election petitioner relied upon. The emphasis is on the
material facts which should be stated in the concise form. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Charan Lal
Sahu Vs. Giani Jail Singh (1984) 1 SCC 390 while considering the “undue influence” as enumerated in
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1945
Section 18(1), emphasizing the need of precise, specific and unambiguous pleading of corrupt practice
particularly with reference to undue influence held thus :—
“Therefore, in order that the offence of undue influence can be said to have been made out within
the meaning of Section 171-C of the Penal Code, something more than the mere act of canvassing for a
candidate must be shown to have been done by the offender. That something more may, for example, be in
the nature of a threat of an injury to a candidate or a voter as stated in sub-section (2) (a) of Section 171-C
of the Penal Code or, it may consist of inducing a belief of Divine displeasure in the mind of a candidate or
a voter as stated in sub-section (2) (b). The act alleged as constituting undue influence must be in the nature
of a pressure or tyranny on the mind of the candidate or the voter it is not possible to enumerate exhaustively
the divers categories of acts which fall within the definition of undue influence it is enough for our purpose
to say, that of one thing there can be no doubt; The mere act of canvassing for a candidate cannot amount to
undue influence within the meaning of Section 171-C of the Penal Code.”
24.
The Supreme Court in case of Krishnamoorthy V. Sivakumar (2015) 3 SCC 467 has reiterated the law laid
down in Aad Lal v. Kanshi Ram 1980 (2) SCC 350 with respect to degree of pleading and proof of undue
infuence. Para 55 of the decision rendered in Krishnamoorthy v. Sivakumar (Supra) is relevant here and
quoted below ;
55
In Aad Lal v. Kanshi Ram, while deliberating on undue influence as enshrined under section
123(2) of the 1951 Act, it has been held thus: (SCC pp 353-54, para 11).
“11.
it has to be remembered that it is an essential ingredient of the corrupt practice of “undue
influence” under sub-section (2) of Section 123 of the Act, that there should be any direct or
indirect interference or attempt to interfere’ on the part of the candidate or his age, or of any other
person with the consent of the candidate or his agent, with the free exercise of any electoral right.
Therre are two provisios to the sub-section, but they are obviously not applicable to the contro-
versy before us. It was therefore, necessary, for the purpose of establishing the corrupt practice of
“undue “influence”, to prove that there was any direct or indirect interference or attempt to inter-
fere with the exercise of any electoral right.
(Emphasis supplied)
25.
With respect to undue influence, the principles have been explained in (2015) 3 SCC Para, 58 which reads
thus :
58.
From the aforesaid authorities, the following principles can be culled out;
58.1
The words “undue influence” are not to be understood or conferred a meaning in the context of
“English Statutes”
58.2
The Indian election law pays regard to the use of such influence having the tendency to bring about
the result that has been contemplated in the clause.
58.3
If an act which is calculated to interfere with the free exercise of electoral right, is the true and effe-
ctive test whether or not a candidate is quilty of undue influence.
58.4
The word “direct or indirect” used in the provision have their significance and they are to be
applied bearing in mind the factual context.
58.5
Canvassing by a Minister or an issue of a whip in the from of a request is permissible unless there
is compulsion on the electorate to vote in the manner indicated.
58.6
The structure of the provisions contained in Section 171-C IPC are to be kept in view while appre-
ciating the expression “undue influence” used in Section 123(2) of the 1951 Act.
58.7
The two provisos added to Section 123(2) do not take away the effect of the principal or main
provision.
58.8
Freedom in the exercise of the judgment which engulfs a voters right a free choice, in selecting
the candidate whom he believes to be best fitted to represent the constituency, has to be given
due weightage.
58.9
There should never be tyranny over the mind which would put fetters and scuttle the free exericse
of an electorate.
58.10
The concept of undue influence applies at both the stages, namely, pre-voting and at the time of
casting of vote.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1946
58.11
“undue influence” is not to be equated with “proper influence” and, therefore, legitimate
canvassing is permissible in a democratic set up.
58.12
Free exrcise of electoral right has a nexus with direct or indirect interference or attempt to
interfere.”
26.
In the instant petition, it would reveal that though different names have been stated by the petitioner but
nowhere the returned candidate has been named to be instrumental in such allurement for withdrawal. The
evidence is completely blurred and ambiguous because the fact that the persons who have been named and
at whose behalf they were working has not been clearly stated. The identity of the said callers who rang up
to different associates of the petitioner is also not clear. The associates of the petitioner who received the
Phone calls have also not come up in evidence and one of the witnesses e., P.W.2 has given shaky evidence
which also do not substantiate any fact, therefore, in absence of such evidence when the proof is required to
be akin to the evidence like a cirminal case no presumption can be drawn Consequently, after evaluating the
entire evidence with respect to the offer made by phone calls, the same has not been established by accept-
able cogent evidence which may lead to show that undue influece was exercised. In the result, it is held that
the petitoner has failed to bring any evidence on record that the returned candidate has exrcised undue
influence threat or pressure for withdrawal of the candidature of petitoner as also the other contesting
candidates. Accordingly, the finding to issue no. 1 s answered in negative i.e., “as not proved”.
27.
Now with respect to issue No. 2 that “whether the respondent No. 1 (returned candidate) had offered free
food and other articles to the electors to influence the electors to vote for him”. the respective pleading and
evidence is examined. At paras 8.11 to 8.14 the petitioner has made different pleadings in this regard. The
reading of petition would show that it is stated that the pettioner visited different polling booths along-with
Arjun Singh Thakur, Rajesh Kumar Pudo, Shri Santosh Yadav and Shri Pankaj Sarkar. They saw that the
voters were brought to the polling booths in transport vehicle bearing No. C.G. 19T 0841 driven by one
vikas Gaine and in another vehicle bearing No. C.G. 04ZD-7891 Dirven by one Asim Das. It has also been
stated that the food articles were also given to the different voters. A perusal of statements of Rupdhar Pudo,
the petitioner; Arjun Singh (P.W.2), Shri Santosh Yadav (P.W.3) and Rajesh Kumar Pudo (P.W. 4) would
show that similar statements have been made. The drivers of the vehicles who have been named as Vikas
Gaine or Asim Das have not been examined. Even they were not summoped. Reading of the statements
would show that the witnesses have deposed that having asked the drivers, they have disclosed that the
voters were being brought at the instance of Bhoj Raj Nag, the returned candidate, and Rs. 200/- was paid
for each voters Except the oral evidence no other supporting evidence in support of fact has been placed on
record. Another person who disclosed the fact is named as Uttam Das. Uttam Das was said to be the worker
of Bjp. He has also not been examined.
28.
Therefore the evidence which has been adduced by witnesses P.W. 1 to P.W. 4 are in similar line that having
aksed the drivers of the vehicles, they discolsed the fact that they had brought the voters at the instance of
the returned candidate is only hearsay. The petitioner did not make any effort even to call for the witnesses
so as to make enlightenment of facts. The said statements are not direct and they contain only bald allega-
tions which have been denied by the respondent No. 1 flatly, therefore, in order to prove the fact that the
voters were being carried at the instance of respondent/returned candidate., it is presumptive to attach the
liability with the returned candidate and such presumption cannot be drawn in an election petition.
29.
Furhter more it is stated that near the voting booths within 100 meters foods were distributed and having
asked it was disclosed that it was at the instance of Bhojraj Nag. Likewise statements have been made by
witnesses P.W. 1 to P.W. 4. The statemnts would show that carryign of voters and the distrubtion of food
were recorded in the video camera and mobile by the witnesses. No evidence has been placed about such
electornic evidence. The petitioner has stated that no complaint was made about the bringing or carrying
the voters by vehicle at Booth No. 18 either to the election and proof there of would be not preponderance
of probabilities as in Civil action but proof beyond reasonable doubt as in criminal trials”.
16.
The above decision has been followed in MercyKutty Amma v. Kadavoor Sivadasan (2004) 2 SCC
217, vide SCC vide SCC pp 225-26 para 27 where it was abserved;
“27.
Allegations of corrupt practices are quasi-criminal charges and the proof that would be
required in the support thereof would be as in a criminal charge. The charges of corrupt
partices are to be equated with crimianl charges and proof thereof would be not preponde-
rance of probabilities as in civil action but proof beyond reasonable doubt as in a crimianl
trial.”
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1947
17.
A basic principle in the law relating to elections and election petitions is that the mandate of the
people as expressed in the electionresults should ordinarily be respected by courts, and the election
of a successful candidate should not be lightly set aside, vide R.P. Moidutty v. P.T. Kunju Mohammad
(2000) 1 SCC 481 vide SCC pp. 488-89, para 14, where it was observed.
“14.
It is a basic to the law of elections and election petitions that in a democracy, the mandate
of the people as expressed at the hustings must prevail and be respected by the courts and
that is why the election of a successful candidate is not to be set aside lightly. A heavy
onus ies on the election petitioner seeking setting aside of the election of a successful
candidate to make out a clear case for such relief both in the pleadings and at the trial. The
mandateof the people is one as has been truly, freely and purely expressed. The electoral
process in a democracy such as ours is too sacrosanct to be permitted to be polluted
by coruupt practices. If the court arrive at a finding of commission of corrupt practice by
a returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of a
returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of a
returned condidate or his election agent then the election of the returned candidate shall
be declared to be void. The underlying principle is that corrupt practice having been
committed, the result of the election does not echo the true voice of the people. As a
consequences flowing from the proof of corrupt practice at the election are serious, the
onus of establishing commission of corrupt practice lies heavily on the person who alleges
the same. The onus of proof is not discharged merely on preponderance of probabilities,
the standard of proof required is akin to that of proving a criminal or quasi-criminal
charge. Clear cut evidence, wholly credible and reliable, is needed to prove beyond doubt
the charge of corrupt practice.”
18.
The same view has been taken by this Court in Mahant Shreo Nath v. Choudhary Ranbir
Singh (1970) 3 SCC 647, SCC at p. 649 para 4; Manphul Singh v. Surinder sing (1973) 2
SCC 599, SCC at p 608 para 13, Rahim Khan v. Kursid Ahmed (1974) 2 SCC 660, SCC at
p. 666, para 9, Bir Chandra Barman vl. Anil Sarkar (1976) 3 SCC 88, SCC at p 91, para 5.
Lakshmi Raman Acharya v. Chandan Singh (1977) 1 SCC 423, SCC at p. 424, para 2; Amolak-
chand Chhazed v. Bhagwandas Arya SCC at p. 573 (1977) 3 SCC 566, SCC at p. 573, para
13.”
32.
Similar view was also taken in Anvar P.V. Vs. P.K. Basheer and others (2014) 10 SCC 473 wherein it was
held that the corrupt practice is substantially akin to the criminal charges and has held as under.
“39.
It is now the settled law that a charge of corrupt practice is substantially akin to a criminal charge.
A two judge bench of this Court while dealing with the said issue in Razik Ram v. Jaswant
Singh Chouhan (1975) 4 SCC 769 held as follows (SCC p. 776 para 15);
“15.
The same evidence which may be sufficient to regard a fact as proved in a civil suit, may
be considered insufficient for a conviction in a criminal action. While in the former, a
mere preponderance of probability may constitute an adequate basis of decision, in the
latter a far higher degree of assurance and judicial certitude is requisite for a conviction.
The same is largely true about proof of a charge of corrupt practice, which cannot be
established by mere balance of probabilities, and, if, after giving due consideration and
effect to the totality of the evidence and circumstances of the case, the mind of the Court
is left rocking with reasonable doubt-not being the doubt of a timid, fickle or vacillating
mind-as to the veracity of the charge, it must hold the same as not proved.”
33.
The same view was followed by the Supereme Court in P.C. Thomas v. P.M. ismail (2009) 10 SCC 239
wherein it was held thus;
“42.
As regards, the decision of this Court in Razik Ram and other decisions on the issue, relied upon on
on behalf of the appellant, there is no quarrel with the legal position that the charge of corrupt
practice is to be equated with criminal charge and the proof required in support thereof would be as
in a criminal charge and not preponderance of probabilities, as in a civil action but proof beyond
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1948
reasonable doubt. It is well settled that it after balancing the evidence adduced there still remains
little boubt in proving the charge, its benefit must go to the returned candidate. However, it is
equally well settled that while insisting upon the statndard of proof beyond a resonable doubt, the
courts are not required to extend or stretch the doctrine to such an extreme extent as to make it
well-nigh impossible to prove any allegation of corrupt practice. Such an approach would defeat
and frustrate the very laudable and sacrosanct object of the Act in maintaining purity of the
electoralprocess, (See 5. Harcharan Singh v. S. Sajjan Singh (1985) 1 SCC 370.”
34.
Thus having regard to the pleadings and evidence on record, this Court is of the opinion that neither the
petitioner is able to prove the undue influence that the respondent or his associates have offered any amount
for withdrawal of the candidature to the petitioner by any acceptable cogent evidence and the evidence
which is on record do not substantiate the facts that the money was offered for withdrawal of the candida-
ture.
35.
Further the evidence of bringing the voters to the polling booth as a also supplying them food has neither
been proved by any acceptable evidence except the oral bald averments. The incidents though were stated to
have been captured by videography, but the same is not placed on record. The alleged complaint made to the
officials about the same incidents i.e., distribution of food and brining of the voters to the polling booths has
also not been placed on record. Therefore, no reliable evidence has been placed on record to show that it
was at the behest of returned candidate and the voters were influenced to exercise their free choice by such
offering. As a result, the petitioner has failed to bring the evidence in view of the law laid down by the
Supreme Court (Supra).
36.
As a result, the election petiton is table to be and is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
GOUTAM BHADURI
JUDGE.
By order,
Sd/-
(NARENDRA N. BUTOLIA)
Principal Secretary,
Election Commission of India.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1949
©UìÊ ãÿÊÿÊ‹ÿ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê •ÊÒ⁄U •Áœ‚ÍøŸÊ∞¢
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 802/Confdl./2018/II-1-5/2018.—It is hereby notified that pursuant to Notification No. K. 13016/01/
2018-US.II dated 01-07-2018 of the Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, (Department of Justice),
New Delhi, Hon’ble Shri Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Judge of the Patna High Court has assumed charge of the
office of the Chief Justice of the High Court of Chhattisgarh in the afternoon of 07th July, 2018.
Bilaspur, the 11th July 2018
No. 810/Confdl./2018/II-1-2/2017.—Hon’ble Shri Justice Thottathil Bhaskaran Nair Radhakrishnan, Chief
Justice, High Court of Chhattisgarh, relinquished the charge of the Chief Justice of the High Court of Chhattisgarh in
the forenoon of 07th July, 2018 upon his Lordship’s appointment as Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh pursuant to notification No. K. 13013/01/2018-US.II
dated 01-07-2018 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Law & Justice, (Department
of Justice), New Delhi.
Bilaspur, the 12th July 2018
No. 813/Confdl./2018/II-2-1/2018.—Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Thakur, Additional District and Sessions
Judge of the special Court for trial of Naxalite Cases, Dantewara is, hereby, assigned the additional charge of the
Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dantewara from the date Shri Nand Kumar Singh Thakur hands
over the charge of the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dantewara nutil further orders.
By order of the High Court,
NEELAM CHAND SANKHLA, Registrar General.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 54/L.G./2018/II-2-10/2007.—Shri K. Vinod Kujur, Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur is hereby,
granted earned leave for 04 days from 18-06-2018 to 21-06-2018 along with permission to remain out of headquar-
ters after the Court hours of 15-06-2018 till 21-06-2018 and earned leave for 06 days from 30-06-2018 to 05-07-2018
along with permission to remain out of headquarters after the Court hours of 29-06-2018 till before the court hours of
06-07-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Kujur, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been working
on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 300+10 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave
account as on date.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1950
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 55/L.G./2018/II-2-17/2006.—Shri A. L. Joshi, I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur is
hereby, granted earned leave for o4 days from 03-07-2018 to 06-07-2018 along with permission to remain out of
headquarters.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Joshi, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been working
on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 280 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 56/L.G./2018/II-2-4/2014.—Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, District & Sessions Judge, Raigarh is hereby,
granted earned leave for 05 days from 29-06-2018 to 03-07-2018 along with permission to leave headquarters from
the evening of 28-06-2018 till the morning of 04-07-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Jaiswal, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 300+10 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave
account as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 57/L.G./2018/II-2-14/2015.—Shri Sudhir Kumar, District & Sessions Judge, Dantewara is hereby, granted
earned leave for 10 days from 06-06-2018 to 15-06-2018 along with permission to leave headquarters after the Court
hours of 05-06-2018 till before the Court hours of 18-06-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Kumar, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 146 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 58/L.G./2018/II-3-14/2003.—Shri Rakesh Bihari Ghore, District & Sessions Judge, Korba is hereby,
granted earned leave for 06 days form 29-06-2018 to 04-07-2018 along wih permission to remain out of headquarters
after working hours of 28-06-2018 till 04-07-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1951
Certified that if Shri Ghore, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been work-
ing on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 279 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 59/L.G./2018/II-3-26/2014.—Shri Shahabuddin Qureshi Officer-on-Special Duty-cum-Central Project
Co-ordinator, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur is hereby, granted earned leave for 05 days from 03-07-2018 to
07-07-2018 along with permission to remain out of headquarters from the evening of 02-07-2018 till the morning of
09-07-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Qureshi, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 169 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 60/L.G./2018/II-3-23/2010.—Shri Shailesh Kumar Tiwari, Judge Family Court, Surguja at Ambikapur
is hereby, granted earned leave for 18 days from 01-05-2018 to 18-05-2018 along with permission to remain out of
heaqquarters from the night 08.00 p.m. of 30-04-2018 till before the office hours of 21-05-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Tiwari, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been work-
ing on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 300+02 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave
account as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 61/L.G./2018/II-2-11/2017.—Dr. Pragya Pachouri, Judge, Family Court, Rajnandgaon is hereby, granted
earned leave for 15 days from 01-06-2018 to 15-06-2018 along with permission to leave headquarters from 01-06-
2018 to 17-06-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Dr. Pachouri, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 79 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account as
on date.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1952
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 62/L.G./2018/II-3-7/2015.—Shri Santosh Sharma, District & Sessions Judge, Baloda-Bazar is hereby,
granted commuted leave for 11 days from 21-05-2018 to 31-05-2018 along with permission to remain out of head-
quarters.
During the period of commuted leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Sharma, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 131 days of half-pay-leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 63/L.G./2018/II-3-2/2009.—Shri Jaideep Vijay Nimonkar, Judge, Family Court, Raigarh is hereby,
granted earned leave for 05 days from 06-06-2018 to 10-06-2018 along with permission to remain out of headquar-
ters.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Nimonkar, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 186 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 64/L.G./2018/II-3-4/2014.—Shri Hemant Saraf, District & Sessions Judge Kanker is hereby, granted
earned leave for 04 days from 30-05-2018 to 02-06-2018 in continuation of summer vacation along with permission
to remain out of headquarters from 19-05-2018 to 03-06-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Saraf, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been working
on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 164 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 65/L.G./2018/II-3-13/2007.—Shri N. D. Tigala, District & Sessions Judge, Bilaspur is hereby, granted
earned leave for 03 days from 16-06-2018 to 18-06-2018 in continuation of summer vacation along with permission
to remain out of headquarters till the morning of 19-06-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1953
Certified that if Shri Tigala, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been work-
ing on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 300+06 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave
account as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 66/L.G./2018/II-3-4/2008.—Shri Neelam Chand Sankhla, the then District & Sessions Judge, Raipur is
hereby, granted earned leave for 04 days from 21-05-2018 to 24-05-2018 with summer vacation along with permis-
sion to remain out of headquarters from 21-05-2018 to 10-06-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Sankhla, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 246 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 67/L.G./2018/II-2-13/2017.—Shri Yogesh Pareek, Special Judge (Atrocities), Korba is hereby, granted
earned leave for 03 days from 28-06-2018 to 30-06-2018 along with permission to remain out of headquarters after
the office hours of 27-06-2018 till before the office hours of 02-07-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Pareek, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been
working on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 137 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave account
as on date.
Bilaspur, the 10th July 2018
No. 68/L.G./2018/II-2-4/2009.—Shri Ashok Kumar Sahu, District & Sessions Judge Mungeli is hereby,
granted earned leave for 05 days from 16-04-2018 to 20-04-2018 along with permission to remain out of headquar-
ters from 16-04-2018 till the night 08.30 p.m. of 20-04-2018.
During the period of earned leave, he shall be entitled to leave salary equal to pay drawn immediately
before proceeding on leave as aforementioned.
Certified that if Shri Sahu, had not proceeded on leave as aforementioned then he would have been working
on the same post.
After deduction of the aforementioned leave, 300+02 days of earned leave are remaining in his leave
account as on date.
By order of the High Court,
ATUL KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, Additional Registrar (ADMN)
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1954
Á’‹Ê‚¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ xÆ ¡ÍŸ wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¢∑§ xv|/ŒÊ-w-x{/wÆÆy.óüÊË ⁄UÊäÊÊÁ∑§‚Ÿ •ª˝flÊ‹, Á¡‹Ê ∞fl¥ ‚òÊ ãÿÊÿÊäÊˇÊ, ŒÈª¸ ∑§Ê ©UŸ∑§ •ÊflŒŸ ¬òÊ ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vv-Æz-
wÆv} ∑§ •ÊäÊÊ⁄U ¬⁄U ŒÊ fl·¸ ∑§Ë πá«U •flÁäÊ •ÕʸØ ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ Æv-vv-wÆvz ‚ xv-vÆ-wÆv| „UÃÈ ©UŸ∑§ •fl∑§Ê‡Ê πÊÃÊ ◊¥ ‡Ê· •Á¡¸Ã •fl∑§Ê‡Ê
◊¥ ‚ xÆ ÁŒfl‚ ∑§ •fl∑§Ê‡Ê ŸªŒË∑§⁄UáÊ ∑§Ë SflË∑ΧÁà ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ, ÁflÁœ •ÊÒ⁄U ÁflœÊÿË ∑§Êÿ¸ Áfl÷ʪ, ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê ∑˝§◊Ê¢∑§ vxÆyÆ/wv-
’/¿U.ª./Æ{ ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ xv-vÆ-wÆÆ{ ∑§ •Ê‹Ê∑§ ◊¥ ¬˝ŒÊŸ ∑§Ë ¡ÊÃË „ÒU.
•ÊŒ‡ÊÊŸÈ‚Ê⁄U,
∞◊. ¬Ë. Á’‚Ê߸, ’¡≈U •Áœ∑§Ê⁄UË.
÷Ê⁄Uà ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê •ÊÒ⁄U •ÁäÊ‚ÍøŸÊ∞¥
⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∞fl¥ •Ê¬ŒÊ ¬˝’¥äÊŸ Áfl÷ʪ
◊¥òÊÊ‹ÿ, ◊„UÊŸŒË ÷flŸ, ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U
ŸÿÊ ⁄UÊÿ¬È⁄U, ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ wx ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
∑˝§◊Ê¥∑§ ∞»§ y-w{/wÆv}/‚ÊÃ-v.ó∑§Êÿ‹Ê äÊÊ⁄U∑§ ˇÊòÊ (•¡¸Ÿ •ÊÒ⁄U Áfl∑§Ê‚) •ÁäÊÁŸÿ◊, v~z| ∑§ •¥Ãª¸Ã ÷Í-•¡¸Ÿ ∑§ ‚¥’¥äÊ ◊¥
÷Ê⁄Uà ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U, ∑§Êÿ‹Ê ◊¥òÊÊ‹ÿ Ÿß¸UÁŒÀ‹Ë mÊ⁄UÊ ¡Ê⁄UË •ÁäÊ‚ÍøŸÊ ÁŒŸÊ¥∑§ vx ¡ÍŸ, wÆv} ∑§Ê ‚fl¸‚ÊäÊÊ⁄UáÊ ∑§Ë ¡ÊŸ∑§Ê⁄UË „UÃÈ ¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ ◊¥
¬˝∑§ÊÁ‡Êà Á∑§ÿÊ ¡ÊÃÊ „ÒU.
•Ê⁄U. ∑§. ø¥ø‹ÊŸË,
•fl⁄U ‚Áøfl.
[ •‚ÊäÊÊ⁄UáÊ ÷Ê⁄Uà ∑§ ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÷ʪ-II, πá«U x-©U¬-π¥«U (ii) ◊¥ ¬˝∑§Ê‡ÊŸÊÕ¸ ]
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1955
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1956
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1957
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1958
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1959
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1960
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1961
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
[ ÷ʪ v
1962
¿UûÊË‚ª…∏U ⁄UÊ¡¬òÊ, ÁŒŸÊ¢∑§ w| ¡È‹Ê߸U wÆv}
÷ʪ v ]
1963
