DHULABHAI KHODARBHAI PATEL Vs. G. K. FAKIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) xxx xxx xxx.

(2.) These two petitioners had contested the election of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Modasa, hold on 12th March 1996. In the said election voters had turn at the place of voting-polling station. But it seems that at the end of the time of voting 4 voters came before the Polling Officer in order to tender their votes. But on verification of record, it was found that the votes in the names of those 4 persons had already taken place earlier. It was the claim of those 4 voters that they had not tender the earlier votes which as per the record of Polling Officer were already tendered and, therefore, they be permitted to caste the votes. The Polling Officer allowed those 4 persons to cast their votes and votes of those 4 persons were kept in separate sealed envelope as tendered vote. After the voting was over, the counting had taken place and it was found that the petitioner in Petition No. 274/96 Dhulabhai Patel had secured 240 votes whereas petitioner in Petition No. 2878/96 had secured 241 votes. Thereafter, 4 votes which were kept in sealed envelope by Director as tendered vote were taken into consideration by opening the sealed envelope and it was found that those 4 votes were in favour of Dhulabhai Patel. Then the Election Officer after veryfying the record found that the earlier 4 votes were tendered in favour of Cangarambhai Patel petitioner in Petition No. 2878/96. He then recorded his finding that the subsequent votes which were tendered as tendered votes were tendered by the genuine persons. He, therefore, counted those 4 votes in favour of the petitioner Dhulabhai Patel petitioner of Petition No. 2724/96 and he deducted 4 votes in favour of Gangarambhai Patel petitioner of Petition No. 2878/96 and thus he declared the result that Dhulabhai Patel had secured 244 votes whereas Gangarambhai Patel had secured 237 votes. He thus declared Dhulabhai Patel as the successful candidate in the said election.

(3.) Being felt aggrieved by the decision of the said Election Officer, the petitioner in Petition No. 2878/96 namely Gangarambhai Patel preferred Election Appeal No. 13 of 1996 before the Director of Agricultural Marketing & Rural Finance. The said respondent No. 1 heard the said appeal and he partly allowed the said appeal by declaring the election in favour of Dhulabhai Patel declared him as a successful candidate was not correct He, therefore, set aside his election. He further turned down the prayer of Gangaram Patel to declare him as a successful candidate and directed to hold a fresh election. Being aggrieved by the said decision given by respondent No. 1 Director of Agricultural Marketing & Rural Finance, Gujarat State, these two petitions are filed. They are heard together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.