C. ARUMUGHAM Vs. R. SIVARAMAN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records in O.P. No. 11 of 1965 on the file of the Principal District Munsif (Election Commissioner), Nagercoil and to quash his order dated 28th February, 1966 setting aside the election and ordering fresh election.

(2.) THE petitioner and the first respondent contested for Marungur Town Panchayat. The petitioner obtained 363 votes and the first respondent 139 votes. So, the petitioner was declared elected. The first respondent filed O.P. No. 11 of 1965 challenging the validity of the election. The election was challenged on several grounds but the Election Commissioner held that the election was invalid and set aside the election on the ground that the petitioner appointed one Mathavan Pillai and seven others as water -supply attenders in the Panchayat a day before the election and that amounted to a corrupt practice. He also found that though only 480 ballot papers were issued, 30 ballot papers were found in the box in excess of ballot papers issued. The Election Commissioner took the view that as there were unaccounted ballot papers, the election was materially affected. He therefore set aside the election and ordered a fresh election.

(3.) THE second ground on which the election was set aside was that 30 ballot papers were found in excess in the ballot box. The Polling Officer was given 580 ballot papers out of which he utilised 483 ballot papers and the remaining 97 ballot papers were unused. Out of 483 used ballot papers, 5 ballot papers were cancelled and 478 were actually utilised by the voters. The Returning Officer found in the ballot box not 478 ballot papers, but 508 ballot papers in total, of which the petitioner secured 363 votes and the first respondent 139 votes. It was pointed out that the accounts relating to ballot papers, Exhibits A -5 and 6, contained several mistakes. Therefore, from the mere fact that there was a difference in the total number of ballot papers in the box, it cannot be inferred that the result of the election had been materially affected.