OMPRAKASH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the order dated 12.07.2010 where by Sub-Divisional Officer / specified authority has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for recounting of votes.

(2.) Shri H.K. Shukla, Learned counsel for the petitioner, has raised a singular contention. He submits that petitioner preferred an application before returning officer for recounting of the votes at the relevant time. The said application was not considered and rejected. On the strength of said application (Annexure P/3) dated 03.02.2010 it was prayed before the specified authority that a direction for recounting be issued. Shri Shukla submits that said authority has rejected the said prayer on the strength of returning officer's letter dated 03.02.2010 (Annexure P/4) by holding that in the said letter, it is mentioned by authority that such application for recounting was not submitted by the petitioner. By taking this Court to Annexure P/4 dated 03.02.2010, letter which is relied upon by the specified authority in ultimate paragraph of rejection order, Shri Shukla submits that finding is perverse.

(3.) Prayer is opposed by Shri R.P. Rathi and Shri Prashant Sharma. They submitted that order is in accordance with law and hence no interference is warranted.