R.S.MADAN,J - (1.) THE petitioner, by way of filing writ petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution, seeks the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the orders dated 12.9.2007/20.9.2007 (Annexure P-3), passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jind, respondent No. 1.
(2.) IN brief the facts of the case are that election for the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Lohchab, Tehsil and District Jind was held on April 03, 2005. The petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 to 7 contested the election for the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat. After the completion of all the formalities, the petitioner having secured 447 votes, was declared winning candidate. The detail of votes secured by each candidate, as per the result- sheet (Annexure P-1) prepared by the Returning Officer, is given as under:- Total votes polled : 1438. Votes secured by the petitioner : 447. Votes secured by respondent No. 2 : 444 Votes secured by other candidates votes : 150, 112, 217, 13 02 and 01 respectively. Votes declared invalid : 52 Thus the total figure comes to 1460-52 = 1386. Dis-satisfied with the election of petitioner as Sarpanch of Village, respondent No. 2 herein, filed election petition before the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jind, who vide order dated 12.9.2007 ordered for recounting of votes on 20.9.2007. On recounting the learned trial Court at page 5 of the order dated September 20, 2007 depicted the following figure, which is relevant to be noticed here :- Tuhi Ram : 1 Dharampal : 3 Parkash : 434+3=437 Pirthvi : 215 Rajbir : 13 Balkar : 112 Harnarain : 434+3=437 Hoshiara : 149 Invalid Votes : 59+14=73 Disputed Votes : 20(14+6) Total :- : 1440 (Actually it should be 1460) Total Votes Polled : 1440 Invalid Votes : 73 Total Number of Valid Votes : 1367 According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, from the bare perusal of the figure shown by the learned trial Court, it is apparent that the figure did not tally with the figure given by the Returning Officer in Annexure P-1.
(3.) IT is pertinent to mention here that as per the order passed by the learned trial court, after recount both the petitioner and respondent No. 2 were found to have secured 437 votes each. As a result thereof, the learned trial Court by adopting the method of draw of lots, declared respondent No. 2 as the winning candidate, vide order dated September 20, 2007 (Annexure P-3). It is this order (Annexure P-3), which the petitioner has challenged by filing the writ petition.;