LAWS(SC)-1964-12-16

SHANKAR BABAJI SAVANT Vs. SAKHARAM VITHOBA SALUNKHE

Decided On December 09, 1964
SHANKAR BABAJI SAVANT Appellant
V/S
SAKHARAM VITHOBA SALUNKHE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following Judgment of the court was delivered by:

(2.) SHANKAR Babaji Savant and Sakharam Vithoba Salunkhe were candidates for election to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly from the Mahad Constituency. There were four other candidates in the field. Savant and Salunkhe got equal number of valid votes. The other candidates got much lesser votes. The Returning Officer drew lots and declared Savant duly elected. Salunkhe filed an election petition claiming that the election was void, and that he, having received the majority of the valid votes. should be declared duly elected. The Election tribunal at Alibag dismissed the petition. On appeal, the Bombay High court declared that the election of Savant was void, and dismissed the rest of the claim made by Salunkhe. Savant now appeals by special leave. The High court rejected Savant's preliminary contention that the first appeal was not maintainable on account of non-compliance with the provisions of s. 119A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. This contention is no longer pressed before us.

(3.) THE charge of Salunkhe that the Returning Officer improperly refused to count these 19 votes cannot be sustained. THE 19 ballot papers were not valid votes. THEy never went inside the ballot box. Rules 39, 44, 47, 56, 57 and 64 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 show that the elector casting his vote must insert the ballot paper into the ballot box, at the close of the polling the ballot papers contained in the ballot box are transmitted by the Presiding Officer to the Returning Officer in sealed covers or bags; the ballot papers taken out of the ballot box are finally scrutinised by the Returning Officer, those not rejected are counted as valid votes and the candidate to whom the largest number of valid votes had been given is declared elected by the Returning Officer. All these provisions indicate that in order to become a valid vote the ballot paper recording the vote must be inserted by the elector into the ballot box. In the circumstances, the Returning Officer rightly refused to count the 19 ballot papers as valid votes.