KALA BAI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 31-8-2005 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Bareli, District Raisen in Election Petition No. 10/a-89 (21)/04-05 Smt. Gayatri Bai v. Kala Bai and Ors. by which the Election Tribunal allowed the election petition filed by Smt. Gayatri Bai under Section 122 of the M. P. Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'adhiniyam'), declared the election of Smt. Kala Bai as void and directed for re-election for the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Khairbada Tehsil Bareli.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the petitioner Smt. Kala Bai and Smt. Gayatri Bai and Smt. Leela Bai were rival contestants for the election of the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Khairbada. Petitioner Smt. Kala Bai was allotted a symbol of Spectacles (Chashma), Smt. Gayatri Bai was allotted the symbol of Tumbler (gilas) and Smt. Leela Bai allotted the symbol of Coconut Tree. The election was held on 16-1-2005. At the time of polling, it revealed that the ballot paper is having 4 symbols while there were only three contestants. One extra election symbol which was printed in the ballot paper was 'handpump' against which no name was appearing as a contestant candidate. No objection was raised by any of the contesting candidates during the course of voting. Thereafter the result was declared in which petitioner Smt. Kala Bai got 331 votes, respondent Smt. Gayatri Bai got 184 votes, Smt. Leela Bai got 140 votes while 34 ballot papers were rejected.

(3.) THIS election was challenged by Smt. Gayatri Bai respondent No. 5 on the ground that the ballot paper was having 4 election symbols. This has confused the voters and the entire election process has been affected by printing of extra symbol on the ballot paper. In the election petition, the petitioner was served, filed reply and as the point involved was the only one which was not in dispute, the SDO after hearing both the parties passed the impugned order and on the aforesaid ground the election of petitioner was set aside. This order is challenged in this petition.