DILIP GUPTA, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, who had been declared elected as a member of Municipality, has filed this petition for setting aside the order dated 12th November, 2009 passed by the Prescribed Authority in Election Petition No.4 of 2006 filed by respondent No.1-Bhagwan Das under Section 19 of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
(2.) THE dispute in the present petition is about the correctness of the treasury challan which accompanied the election petition that had been filed by respondent No.1 under Section 19 of the Act. Under Section 19 of the Act, the said treasury challan should show that the prescribed security amount had been deposited. In this regard Issue No.5 was framed in the election petition and the Prescribed Authority has decided this issue in favour of the election petitioner. Sri P.K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the security amount was required to be deposited under the head 8442 in terms of the Circular dated 28th November, 2006 issued by the State Election Commission but the election petitioner had deposited the security amount in a different head bearing no. 0070-02-101. Thus, according to him, the election petition was not filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 20(5) of the Act and should not have been entertained. He, therefore, submitted that the Prescribed Authority committed an illegality in deciding issue No. 5 in favour of the election petitioner.
(3.) SRI V.P. Shukla, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1-Bhagwan Das, who had filed the election petition, submitted that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity and the petition should be dismissed.;