- (1.) Vide Annexure P.2 in the election petition filed by respondent No.2 before the Election Tribunal, Bathinda, as per grounds (d), (e), and (f), it was submitted that the writ petitioner was declared winner even though the counting was not yet completed. It was argued that the bundles of votes were not got checked even though he made such a request. The said respondent also alleged malafide against the counting staff in his election petition. It also appears that his request in terms of Rule 33 of the Punjab State Election Commission Rules, 1994, was turned down by the authorities. This Rule on reproduction reads as under:- "33. Counting of votes (Section 66). - (1) In a Sabha area where there is only one polling Station, the Returning Officer shall follow the following procedure for the counting of votes and declaration of result for election to the Gram Panchayat. (2) The Presiding Officer shall, as soon as practicable, after the close of the poll and in the presence of any candidate or polling agent who may be present - (a) inspect and also allow an opportunity to candidate or their polling agents to inspect the ballot-boxes and their seals to satisfy themselves that they are in order; (b) open the ballot-box after checking the mark or marks made on the box and the label affixed, takes out the ballot papers from the box and arrange them in convenient bundles, separating the ballot-papers which he deems valid from those he rejects; (c) allow the candidates and their agents who may be present, reasonable opportunity to inspect all ballot-papers, which is in the opinion of the Presiding Officer, are liable to be rejected but shall not allow them to handle those or any other ballot papers. The Presiding Officer shall on every ballot-paper which is rejected, endorse the word "rejected" and record briefly on such ballot-papers the grounds for its rejection. A brief record shall be kept of the serial numbers of all ballot-papers rejected; (d) count the valid votes given in each candidate with the . aid of persons appointed to assist the counting of votes and declare the election of the candidate who is found to have obtained the largest number of valid voters, or, if more than one member is to be elected for the Gram Panchayat then the candidates who are found to have obtained the largest number of valid votes shall be declared to have been elected; (e) after the counting of ballot-papers contained in all the ballot- boxes has been completed, the Returning Officer shall record a statement in Form IX showing the total number of vote polled by each candidate."
(2.) Under the circumstances, the Election Tribunal has ordered recounting of votes holding that it will not harm the interests of any party and rather the real picture would emerge before the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the petitioner (winning candidate) vehemently submitted that under the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994, there is no provision for recounting. It seems that since Rule 33 provides adequate safeguards therefore, no specific provision for re-counting has been incorporated in the Act. Moreover, this Court in the matter of Gurtej Singh v. Darbara Singh, 2000 2 RCR(Civ) 525has held that to finally do complete justice between the parties and to avoid unnecessary protracted litigation, the order of re-counting is an effective and expeditious solution to the election petition. A somewhat similar view has also been taken in the matter of Mander Singh v. Mangal Singh, 2000 126 PunLR 835. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order of recounting which has been passed after recording some evidence. Hence, this writ petition (being No 16613 of 2004), being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed.;