ALOK SHARMA,J. - (1.) Vide order dated 23.03.2017 in SBCWP No.3053/2017 a reference was made to the Larger Bench as under:- "The issue in the petition is as to whether an election petition under Section 43 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1994') read with Rule 81 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Election Rules, 1994 (hereinafter 'the Rules of 1994') filed by an Advocate on the strength of his vakalatnama conferring authorization to present it, in law is a valid presentation or not."
(2.) The said reference has been answered on 20.04.2017 as under:- "8. We answer the reference as under:- An election petition presented by a Lawyer on the strength of a Vakalatnama would be deemed to have been duly presented if the language of the Vakalatnama expressly records that the Lawyer is authorised to present the election petition. It would then be a question of fact to be determined by the Tribunal keeping in view the language of the Vakalatnama. If the language of the Vakalatnama expressly records that the Lawyer is authorised to present the election petition, it would be a case of valid presentation of the election petition."
(3.) In the context of the answer to the reference by the Division Bench as recorded herein above it has to be considered on the facts on record as to whether the respondent-election petitioner (hereinafter 'election petitioner') had authorised his counsel by the 'Vakalatnama' signed to present the election petition.;