RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein challenges the declaration of result dtd. 10/1/2016 (Annexure P-5), impugned order dtd. 10/1/2016 (Annexure P-6) and notification dtd. 10/2/2016 (Annexure P-12) in the matter of election for the post of Sarpanch of village Pathri, Block Israna, District Panipat.

(2.) The principle ground on which the present writ petition has been filed is that the procedure, required to be followed, when there are equal number of votes to the candidate winning the election and the rival petitioner, was not followed as laid down in the Act and the Rules. The averments of the petition itself indicates that the petitioner relied on the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Prithvi Raj v. State Election Commission, Punjab and others 2007 (3) R.C.R. (Civil) 817 : 2007 (3) PLR 453 and some other judgments of this Court to buttress the contention that the writ petition would be maintainable rather than the election petition. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the High Court can bypass the self imposed rule not to entertain a writ petition in the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction when according to him, it is a glaring case that exists in favour of the petitioner as there is evidence in the form of videography and report of State Election Commissioner and District Election Officer.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that taking note of this judgment referred by him, this Court issued notice of motion and, thus, entertained the present writ petition. He then went on to submit that this Court also ordered production of video recording as well as the original slips from BDPO and the same were ordered to be kept in the custody of learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana and that the petitioner will see the video recording as well as the original slips. He firmly states that he did not file the election petition and chose to pursue the present writ petition. He also argued that Sec. 176(4)(a)(iii) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Election Act, 1994 doe's not enable the petitioner to raise the ground regarding amendment of provisions of Act and the Rules in the subject matter of the present petition and therefore, this petition is required to be decided by this Court.