AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has challenged order dated 24.8.2005, Annexure P-4 passed by respondent No. 2, whereby recount of the votes had been ordered.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that on 3.4.2005, the petitioner and respondent No. 1 contested the election for the post of Sarpanch and the petitioner was declared as elected. Respondent No. 1 filed an election petition challenging the election of the petitioner on the ground that the counting of votes was improper and valid votes of respondent No. 1 were illegally rejected whereas illegal votes of the petitioner had been accepted. In the election petition, respondent No. 1 filed an application for the summoning of the record of election for recounting of the votes. Respondent No. 2 accepted the said application and had ordered for recounting i.e. scrutiny and computation of votes. It is this order which has been impugned in the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that from the perusal of the election petition, it would be seen that it contains only vague assertions without reference to any material particulars and does not disclose any cause of action for the recounting of votes and, therefore, respondent No. 2 while ordering recounting of votes has acted with material irregularity and the order, thus, cannot be sustained.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for respondent No. 1 submitted that the order of recounting had been validly passed and supported the order passed by respondent No. 2.;