- (1.) In these two writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the directions given by Election Tribunal to recount the votes polled in the election of Panch. The issue being common, both these writ petitions No.5105 of 2011 and 5108 of 2011 are being disposed of by this common order.
(2.) The election of Gram Panchayat, Village Sukhanand was held on 26.5.2008. The petitioner polled 203 votes but still was not declared elected, though respondent No.1 who polled 200 votes, was declared elected. It is alleged that respondent No.1 obtained signatures of the petitioner on blank paper while he was under the influence of liquor and converted it into an affidavit showing that he had polled 200 votes whereas respondent No.1 had polled 227 votes. Respondent No.1 used this affidavit to file an election petition challenging the election of the petitioner. The Election Tribunal has now ordered recount of the votes without their being any prayer for recount instead of deciding the election petition. The petitioner has challenged the order whereby recount of votes is ordered by Election Tribunal - respondent No.23.
(3.) In CWP No.5108 of 2011 filed by Gurjant Singh, the petitioner has impugned this very order whereby Election Tribunal has ordered recount of the votes polled in his favour and in the favour of respondent No.1 Gurcharan Singh, who had contested the election of Panch in the category of Scheduled Caste. As per the averment, the petitioner had polled 50 votes in his favour whereas respondent No.1 got 49 votes. It is the same affidavit which Harbhol Singh made Pargat Singh to sign after obtaining his signatures in blank paper, which is pleaded as ground to challenge the election of the petitioner Gurjant Singh by his rival candidate Gurcharan Singh (respondent No.1). Election Tribunal has directed recount of votes in this petition as well. As per the petitioner, this is so ordered though there was no request made for recount of votes.;