V.G. Oak, J. - (1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution arises out of an election dispute. Daryao Singh, petitioner and Mohan Lal, respondent No. 2 were candidates for election to the office of Pradhan of a certain Gaon Sabha. According to the counting of votes at the end of the poll, Daryao Singh obtained 175 votes; and Mohan Lal got 165 votes. Daryao Singh was, there-fore, declared elected Pradhan.
(2.) Mohan Lal filed an election petition challenging Daryao Singh's election. The Tribunal concluded that mistakes of various kinds had been committed in receiving and counting votes. It was found that nine women, who had voted for Daryao Singh, were not residents of the area. The Tribunal concluded that those nine women were not entitled to participate in the election. After deducting those nine votes and other adjustment, the Tribunal found that Mohan Lal had received more votes than Daryao Singh. On this view, the Tribunal set aside Daryao Singh's election, and declared Mohan Lal elected Pradhan. Hence this writ petition by Daryao Singh.
(3.) The question of votes of the nine women was discussed by the Tribunal under issue No. 1. The Tribunal found that although the nine women were not residents of the area, their names were on the electoral roll. The Tribunal concluded that, under the circumstances the nine women could not participate in the election. Correctness of that view has been challenged in the writ petition.;