BHALLE RAM Vs. SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE JIND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed under the following circumstances:--

(2.) THE petitioner and respondents Nos. 3 to 11 contested the panchayat elections held on July 3, 1971 for membership of the Gram Panchayat of village Ikkas, tehsil and District Jind. There was a tie between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 for the last seat of a panch, as both of them had polled 76 votes each. One of the votes, polled by the petitioner was, however declared to be invalid on the ground that it did not bear the official mark of the presiding officer, respondent no. 2 as required by Rule ' 34 (b) of the Haryana Gram Panchayat Election Rules, 1971. The petitioner was, therefore, declared to have lost the contest for the last seat and respondent No. 3 was returned as the successful member of the Gram panchayat. The petitioner filed an election petition, but it is has been dismissed by the prescribed authority respondent No. 1, by his order dated August, 8, 1972. (Annexure A to the writ petition ). The petitioner, therefore, prays that the impugned order of respondent No. 1 should be quashed and the return of respondent No. 3, as a member of the Gram Panchayat should be set aside.

(3.) NO one has put in appearance on behalf of any of the respondents. The main submission made by Shri Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that there should have been an express mandatory direction issued under Rule 16, that the ballot papers shall contain an official mark before a ballot paper could be rejected under Rule 34 (b) of the Haryana Gram Panchayat Election Rules, 1971 on the ground of the omission or absence of that official mark. This submission can be properly appreciated only if we reproduce the pertinent rule, which runs as follows:--