G SUNITHA Vs. ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the Counsel on record.

(2.) The learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner Sri P. Giri Krishna states that when the petitioner requested for recounting and made an application, the Returning Officer is not justified in declaring the result of the election. The learned Counsel also had taken this Court through the relevant Rules and would contend that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the direction, which is prayed for in the writ petition, be granted or rule nisi to be issued and appropriate interim direction to be granted.

(3.) On the contrary, Sri Prabhakar Rao, learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1 to 3, would maintain that inasmuch as the Returning Officer already had rejected the plea of the petitioner and in view of the fact that the result of the election also had been duly declared, the remedy available to the writ petitioner is only to approach the Election Tribunal and hence at this stage the writ petition cannot be entertained.