Mootham, C.J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against an order of a learned Judge dated 8 -3 -1956.
(2.) THE Appellant and respondent No. 2 were candidates for election to the office of Pradhan of a Gaon Sabha. The election was held on 15 -12 -1955, and on 3 -1 -1956, the Appellant was declared to be duly elected. For the purposes of the election the electoral district was divided into two wards named Gher Sarjit Singh and Gher Zamindar Singh, the votes obtained by the two candidates being as follows: On 4 -1 -1956, that is to say on the day after the result of the election had been declared, it was discovered that the polling return in respect of Ward Gher Sarjit Singh had been tampered with, the number 253 representing the votes cast for the second Respondent having been altered to 353 and then again changed to the original number 253. An enquiry was made by the Assistant Panchayat Raj Officer who found that the person responsible for the tampering was the Panchayat Secretary at the instance of the second Respondent. The matter was brought to the attention of the District Magistrate and he by an order dated 9 -2 -1956 directed that a fresh poll be taken on the ensuing 2nd March, a date which was subsequently changed to the 15th March. The effect of this order was to set aside the election of the Appellant as Pradhan. In the meantime on 8 -3 -1956, the Appellant filed a petition in this Court in which he challenged the validity of the District Magistrate's order dated 9 -2 -1956, and prayed that it be quashed by a writ of certiorari.(sic) That petition was dismissed by the learned Judge on the ground that the order of the District Magistrate was in accordance with the provisions of R. 19F of the UP Panchayat Raj Rules and it is from that order of dismissal that the Appellant now appeals. During the hearing of the appeal the Court was informed that as a result of the fresh election held in Ward Gher Sarjit Singh on 15 -3 -1956, the second Respondent had been declared elected and on an application made by the Appellant leave granted to him to amend his petition by the addition thereto of a prayer that the election of the second Respondent be declared null and void.
(3.) R . 19F reads thus: (1) If at any election any polling return is taken out of the custody of the Returning officer or of any Presiding officer or is in any way tampered with or is either accidentally or intentionally destroyed or lost, the election to which such return relates shall be void. (2) Whenever the polling at any polling place shall become void Under Section ub R. (1), the Returning Officer shall as soon as may be, after the act or event causing such voidance has come to his knowledge, report the matter to the District Magistrate and shall, with his previous approval appoint a day for the taking of a fresh poll at such polling place and fix the hours during which the poll will be taken. (3) In every such case as aforesaid the Returning officer shall take a fresh poll at such polling place as aforesaid on the day so appointed by him, and shall notify the date so appointed and the hours of polling so fixed by him in such manner as may be specified by him and the provisions of this chapter shall apply to every such fresh poll as they apply to the original poll.;