RADHESHYAM JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition raises question regarding the validity of one vote cast in favour of the petitioner. The said vote was rejected under Rule 11 of the M.P. Municipalities (President and Vice President) Election Rules, 1962. Rule 11 reads as under: -

(2.) THE elections of Municipal Council, Gadarwara were held and the petitioner was elected councillor. The election to the post of President, Municipal Council was held on 29.12.94. The two candidates received ten votes each. Out of 21 councillors who had participated, one vote was rejected on the ground that it was invalid under Rule 11. There was a tie between the petitioner and the respondent No.4, having got 10 votes each under Rule 12 by draw of lots, the respondent was declared elected as President, Municipal Council, Gadarwara. It is not in dispute that after the elections, a notice to hold the first general meeting was called by the Collector to meet the President and Vice -President, on 29.12.1994 at 11 a.m. All 21 councillors had participated. Three nominations were filed, one by Radheshyam Jaiswal, second of Virendra Mahajan and third by Navneet Chachha. Navneet Chachha withdrew from the contest, as such, it became necessary to hold election for the post of President. As already stated, there was a tie on account of one vote being rejected. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the rejection of one vote in favour of the petitioner was illegal inasmuch as the competent authority did not correctly interprete Rule 11 and failed to appreciate that it does not in any way disclose the identity of the voter. Had this been correctly counted, the petitioner would have been selected as President of the Council.

(3.) IT is submitted that the competent authority therefore committed an error in rejecting the vote and in adopting the procedure by draw of lots. There was no question of rejection of votes. The declaration of respondent No.4 as elected was therefore liable to be set -aside.