ATHAR HUSSAIN Vs. SMT. RAZDA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Irshad Ali for the petitioner; Sri M. Islam for the respondent No. 1; learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 5, 6 and 7 and perused the record.

(2.) An election petition was filed by the petitioner under Sec. 12-C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 challenging the election of the respondent No. 1. One of the alternative reliefs claimed in the election petition was that the Court should call for the record and direct for recount of the votes. It appears that on the basis of the pleadings exchanged between the parties as many as 12 issues were framed for determination. By order dated 19th Jan., 2017, the Prescribed Authority decided all 12 issues in favour of the election petitioner and directed the Assistant Election Officer (Panchasthani), Amroha to produce the sealed votes and recount the same on a particular date. Against the order dated 19th Jan., 2017, the returned candidate filed a revision under Sec. 12-C (6) of the Act in the Court of District Judge, Amroha. By the impugned order dated 3rd Feb., 2017, the District Judge, Amroha entertained the revision and stayed the operation of the order dated 19th Jan., 2017.

(3.) Challenging the order dated 3rd Feb., 2017 the present petition has been filed. The main ground on which the impugned order has been challenged is that revision against the order of recount was not maintainable because the same is an interlocutory order against which no revision was maintainable and, therefore, the order passed by the District Judge, Amroha is liable to be set aside. In support of the aforesaid contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Mohd. Mustafa Vs. Up - Ziladhikari, Phoolpur, Azamgarh and others : (2007) 3 UPLBEC 2636, wherein it has been held that a revision under Sec. 12-C (6) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 shall lie only against a final order passed by the Prescribed Authority deciding the election petition and not against any interlocutory order or order of recount of votes passed by the Prescribed Authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on a decision of this Court in Writ C No.12408 of 2006, dated 29th April, 2016, which followed the judgement of Division Bench in Mohd. Mustafa (supra).