KARUNAKARAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner challenges the election of fourth respondent, as Honorary Treasurer of respondent - Sports Council. The election was held on 31-8-1991 and sixty seven members of the Council were present, and they voted. Thirty four votes were polled for petitioner, and thirty three for fourth respondent. Petitioner objected to the reception of one vote obtained by fourth respondent. But, the objection was overruled, One vote polled by petitioner was invalidated on the ground that the ballot paper did not bear the signature of the Secretary, though it bore the seal of the Council. Thus, each candidate secured thirty three votes. Then, the President (who had not voted earlier), polled his casting vote in favour of fourth respondent, and he was declared elected.

(2.) Petitioner contends that a valid vote was invalidated improperly. He would contend further that the President could not have polled his casting vote, as a casting vote can only be a second vote. In answer, respondents would submit that the vote was in order, and that the President was within his rights in casting his vote.

(3.) The invalidated ballot paper did not contain the signature of the Secretary. Yet, in the absence of any fraud, it should hot have been rejected - submits petitioner. There is no mandatory requirement regarding affixture of signature on the ballot paper. A voter or candidate should not be penalised for the carelessness or folly of the Secretary who was to sign ballot papers, submits petitioner. In the view of respondents the rejection is valid because, the election is not something exclusively between a candidate and the Election Officer, but it is something concerning all the voters, and Rules must be strictly observed.