- (1.) Petitioner claims that preparation of ballot paper, in alleged violation of conduct of Election Rules, Regulations and Instructions, thereby putting his name at serial no.6 of the list of contesting candidates, instead of putting his name at serial no. 12 at the end of the list, has materially affected the result of election of the returned candidate. Facts first.
(2.) General Election to the Punjab Legislative Assembly was held on 30.1.2012. Instant election petition pertains to 81-Abohar Assembly Constituency. As per election schedule, last date for filing of nomination was 12.1.2012. Scrutiny of nomination was to take place on 13.1.2012. Last date of withdrawal of nomination was 16.1.2012. Date of poll was 30.1.2012 and counting of votes was to take place on 6.3.2012. After withdrawal of nominations on 16.1.2012, 12 contesting candidates remained in the fray. After withdrawal of the nominations, returning officer was to prepare the list of contesting candidates in form 7-A appended to the conduct of Election Rules 1961 ('Election Rules' for short). The list was to be prepared under Rule 10 of the Election Rules and was to be published as provided under Section 38 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 ('R.P. Act' for short).
(3.) As pleaded by the petitioner in para 5 of the election petition, following were the 12 candidates who contested the election from 81- Abohar Assembly Constituency to the Punjab Legislative Assembly (Vidhan Sabha) 2012:- i. Sunil Kumar Jakhar ii. Kuldeep Singh iii.Vijay Laxmi Bhadoo iv.Amarjeet Singh v.Shiv Charan Doda vi.Shiv Lal Doda vii.Sunita Doda viii.Suresh Kumar Satija ix.Gurjant Singh x.Dalip Kumar xi.Mahavir Kumar xii.Rajinder Kumar Name of the petitioner was at serial no. 6, whereas name of respondent-returned candidate was at serial no. 1 of the list of contesting candidates. The case set up by the petitioner is that the ballot paper was required to be prepared in alphabetical order and as per the alphabets of Punjabi, his name ought to have been put at serial no. 12 at the end of the list, because his name starts with Punjabi Gurmukhi alphabet S (Sh). Name of the respondent-returned candidate was at serial no.1 because his name starts with Punjabi Gurmukhi alphabet s (S). It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that his name was to be put at serial no. 9 of the independent contesting candidates in the following order:- i. Amerjeet Singh ii. Sunita Doda iii.Suresh Kumar Satija iv.Gurjant Singh v.Dalip Kumar vi.Mahavir Kumar vii.Rajinder Kumar viii.Shiv Charan Doda ix.Shiv Lal Doda It is further pleaded case of the petitioner that, since ballot paper was prepared and published contrary to the Election Rules, by inserting his name at serial no. 3 amongst the independent candidates and at serial no. 6 amongst all 12 contesting candidates, instead of putting his name at the end in the ballot paper, his voters and supporters were misled. It is also pleaded by the petitioner that his voters, when failed to found the name of the petitioner at the end of the ballot paper, especially the illiterate voters, they casted their votes in favour of the person at serial no. 1 under the impression that, firstly it also started with Punjabi Gurmakhi alphabet S (Sh) and secondly that it was the name of the petitioner at serial no. 1 instead of last. Thus, the chances of winning the election by the petitioner were diminished due to wrong publication of the ballot paper, as alleged by the petitioner. With the above-said allegations, petitioner seeks that election of respondent-returned candidate be set aside and be declared as void, from 81-Abohar Constituency.;