DALDAPAT BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.3.

(2.) Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.1.2013.

(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that merely on the basis of discrepancy in form nos. 11 and 6 of booth nos. 17 and 23, no recounting could have been ordered. The opposite party no.3 was supposed to lead specific evidence in support of his pleading and as and when, pleading was complete and evidence adduced thereof was sufficient to make out the case for recounting, only then recounting could have been ordered. He has placed reliance upon the judgment in the cases of Mahendra Pal vs. Shri Ram Dass Malanger and others, 2002 20 LCD 993 and Amit Narain Rai vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012 2 UPLBEC 1582.