T PENCHALAIAH Vs. ELECTION COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question as to what could be treated as 'material facts' for purposes of Sec. 83(1) (a) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, corresponding to Rule 51(2) of the A.P. Gram Panchayats (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 1978, arises for discussion in this writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner Sri T. Penchalaiah was declared as Sarpanch of the Bogulu gram panchayat, Nellore District by a majority of 27 votes in an election held on 14-3-1988 and one of the four unsuccessful candidates, Smt. Ch. Padmalata (2nd respondent in this W.P.) 61ed the election petition O.P. No. 9 of 1988 before the Election Tribunal-cum-Principal District Munsif, Kavali, seeking 'recount' on the ground of several irregularities in the process of counting and the learned tribunal, oy an elaborate judgment dated 18-8-1989, allowed the petition and ordered recount. It is against this order that the successful candidate has preferred this writ petition. The election petition contained certain allegations regarding irregularities in counting and these were disputed in the counter filed by the writ petitioner.

(3.) The election petitioner examined herself as P.W. 1 and one of her counting agents as P.W. 2 and murked Ex. A-1. The election officer examined himself as R.W.1 while the writ petitioner and one of his counting agents were examined as R.Ws. 2 and 3. The election petitioner filed I.A. 31/89 to recall the election officer (R.W. 1) for cross-examining him with reference to a xerox copy of Form 9 (the declaration of election) which contained different figures than the declaration (Ex B-1) on the basis of which the writ petitioner was declared elected. The I.A. was allowed. As the election officer did not appear, an adverse inference was drawn.