USHA BAI Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GANJ, BASODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE brief facts for the purposes of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are as under : -

(2.) THE learned Sub Divisional Officer decided the election petition without framing issues and without recording evidence. As evidence was not recorded, the question of giving opportunity to cross examine the witnesses did not arise. It is this course adopted by the returning officer which is being impugned in the present petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel, appearing for the respondent, has placed reliance on a decision given by the Supreme Court in the case of Roop Lal Sathi v. Nach -hatar Singh reported in : AIR 1982 SC 1559. It is sought to be contended that the action of the returning officer allotting symbols is an action which is equally covered by the provisions of section 100 (1) (d) (iv) of the Representation of People Act. It is accordingly, urged that if on account of non -compliance of the rules which deal with allocating of symbols something has happened which affects the result of the election, the same can be made a ground of challenge So far as this abstract proposition of law is concerned, there can be no dispute. What is required to be seen is as to whether it has been established as a fact that the result of the election has been materially effected or not.