JAI KARAN Vs. BHIM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) While hearing the civil miscellaneous application for condonation of delay, it was directed that let the LPA itself be decided on merits. Accordingly, the LPA was heard on merits.

(2.) Bhim Singh, petitioner, challenged the election to the office of the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat of village Pahu Akbarpur, Tehsil and District Rohtak which was held on 18.8.1988, by way of an election petition. The petitioner and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were the candidates for the office of Sarpanch and their position was as under : Votes obtained Votes cancelled Valid Votes The Petitioner 1,587 26 1,561 Respondent No. 3 1,585 12 1,573 Respondent No. 4 1,191 19 1,172 4,363 57 4,306

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the view taken by the learned Single Judge was wholly wrong and erroneous. For every booth, a Presiding Officer is appointed. Admittedly 22 ballot papers which were rejected by the Returning Officer at the time of counting did not bear the signatures of the Presiding Officer of that booth. Thus, argued the learned counsel, the findings of the authorities below could not be set aside in writ jurisdiction by the learned Single Judge.