BODALA SURESH KUMAR Vs. TURIBILLI NARASIMGARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ELECTION to Kantakapalli Gram Panchayat of Kothavalasa Mandal, vizianagaram District was held on 02. 08. 2006. The petitioner, the first respondent, and another person, by name Bodala Venkataramana contested for the office of Sarpanch. They secured 520, 515 and 454 votes respectively. The petitioner was declared elected as Sarpanch by the Returning Officer, the fourth respondent herein.

(2.) THE first respondent filed E. O. P. No. 7 of 2006 in the Court of the Junior civil Judge-cum-Election Tribunal, Kothavalasa, challenging the election of the petitioner. He pleaded that certain irregularities have taken place at the time of counting the votes. According to him, the counting of votes started at 2. 00 p. m. on the date of polling and on account of heavy rain and cloudy sky, the light was poor and there was no electricity. It was alleged that the charging lamp that was used went off frequently and a large number of people have gathered into counting hall, causing disturbance. An allegation was made to the effect that several votes polled in favour of the first respondent were declared invalid. Certain other allegations were also made. The petitioner was impleaded as the second respondent in the E. O. P. The first respondent in the E. O. P. i. e. Bodala Venkataramana, remained ex parte. The petitioner filed a counter-affidavit denying the allegations made by the first respondent. He stated that the counting was undertaken in the presence of all the three candidates and their counting agents, and even the first respondent did not raise any objection till the results were declared. According to him, the first respondent made a request for recounting only after the results were declared and forms were signed. The fourth respondent herein also denied the allegation made by the first respondent and he pleaded that the counting was done strictly in accordance with the guide-lines prescribed therefor. He denied the allegations as to darkness or interference in the polling process by others.

(3.) THROUGH its order, dated 16. 03. 2009, the Tribunal directed recounting of votes. The same is challenged in this writ petition.