AJIT SINGH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER-CUM-SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ELECTION TRIBUNAL (PANCHAYAT ELECTIONS), BATHINDA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cm No.21118-CII of 2015

(2.) It is the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that one vote of Rajdev Singh, Numberdar, which was polled in favour of appellant-petitioner, has been counted in favour of respondent-Gurmail Singh. That apart, he asserts that four votes of appellant-petitioner have been cancelled but those votes have not been shown to the appellant or his agents at the time of counting as mandated under Rule 33 (C) of the Punjab Panchayat Election Rules, 1994. He further contends that there is a difference of only one vote between the appellant and respondent-Gurmail Singh and if one vote which has wrongly been credited to respondent No.1, goes to the benefit of the appellant, he would stand elected and in any case, if the said vote is a cancelled vote, the votes would be equal and the process has to be further taken as provided under the Rules. Prayer has, thus, been made for setting aside the impugned order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum-Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal (Panchayat Elections), Bathinda, without considering the said aspect.

(3.) I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and with his able assistance, have gone through the impugned order.