P SAROJA Vs. N MEERA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition has been filed against the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Chirigleput in Election o. P. No. 168 of 2001 on 31:1. 2003.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to the filing. of this civil revision petition can. be stated as follows: There was, election for the President of Urapakkam panchayat Board on 18. 10. 2001 and in that election, one Meera Bai contested in the symbol of Aeroplane as DMK party candidate and one Saroja in the symbol of light House as AIADMK Party candidate and likewise eight more candidates also contested on various symbols. Counting of votes was held on 2i. 10. 2001 in the presence of Returning Officer cum Commissioner, Kattankulathur Panchayat Union, chingleput District. As per the counting, Meera Bai secured 818 votes and saroja secured 825 votes and other candidates also secured votes of different denomination out of the total votes polled viz. , 4176. Out of the total votes, 379 votes were declared as invalid. Meera Bai secured two votes in the second ward and nine votes with distinct marks. But, some of the votes polled for the said Meera Bai were added with invalid votes and thereby Saroja was declared as successful candidate, with the margin of seven vote. In fact, the said Meera bai secured more votes than the said Saroja. It so happened because the votes polled were not separated properly due to the influence of the said Saroja and the Returning Officer ignored the request of Meera Bai at the time of counting and separating the votes. Further, the Returning, Officer and other election officials have not allowed Meera Bai and other candidates for verifying the vote properly. Meera Bai also gave objection letter to the Commissioner by saying that if recounting is ordered, she would have fair chance of success. Anyhow, the Returning Officer has not followed the principles of Tamil Nadu panchayat Act and its Election Rules and thereby the Election of Saroja as successful candidate is void and recounting should be ordered.

(3.) ON the side of Meera Bai, herself has been examined as pw1 and a Xerox copy of objection letter given to the Returning Officer has been marked as Ex. Pl. ON the ide of Saroja, herself has been examined as RW1 and her agent Bala Dhandayatham has been examined as RW2 and the Assistant Election officer concerned with Urapakkam Panchayat Board Election has been examined as rw3.