- (1.) THE petitioner has impugned the order of the Appellate Authority under Section 13-V of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1953 (for short, the Act) in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) REFERENCE to a few relevant facts is necessary to appreciate the point of law arising for adjudication. Election for the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Village Bahu Akbarpur, Tehsil and District Rohtak was held on August 18, 1988. The petitioner and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were the candidates for the office of Sarpanch in that election. The number of votes polled in favour of these three contestants was as under : -Votes obtained Votes cancelled Valid Votes Petitioner 1587 26 1561 Respondent No. 3 1585 12 1573 Respondent No. 4 1192 19 1172 -------------- -------------- -----------4363 57 4306 Respondent No. 3 was declared elected. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the election of respondent No. 3 before the prescribed authority under the Act. The order of the prescriled authority was upheld on appeal by the Appellate Authority.
(3.) THE principal grouse of the petitioner was that the valid votes polled in his favour were wrongly rejected. The Appellate Authority arrived at the following finding :- "in view of my detailed discussion above, in my opinion, the Returning Officer had rightly rejected the 22 votes cast in favour of Bhim Singh appellant as the same were bearing the signatures of other Presiding Officers order than the Presiding Officers of the relevant booths and as Such the said votes were liable to be rejected under Rule 34 (b) of the Rules. Similarly, one vote which was not having the signatures of the Presiding Officer at all and was not having any other distinguished mark, in my opinion, was also liable to be rejected in view of the provisions of Rule 34 (b) of the Rules. Furthermore, the remaining 3 votes which were meant for the use for the election of Panches, in my opinion, were also liable to be rejected as the present election pertained to the office of Sarpanch. " The Appellate Authority held that 22 votes cast in favour of the petitioner were validly rejected since these votes bore signatures of the Presiding Officers other than the Presiding Officers of the relevant booths in which these votes were cast and consequently these votes were liable to be rejected under Rule 34 (2) of the Haryana Gram Panchayat Election Rules, 1971 (for short, the Rules), If these votes were validly rejected, the order of the Appellate Authority is unexceptional.;