MAGHA RAM Vs. SHRI HANWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition of Magharam is directed against the judgment of the learned munsiff, Ratangarh dated 24-9-70 whereby the election petition of respondent No. 1 Shri Hanuwant Singh filed under Rule 6 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti and zila Parishads (Election Rules), 1959 challenging the election of the petitioner was accepted.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this petition are in a nut-shell, as follows:-On account of the retirement of the two members from the Standing committee (Finance, Tax and Administration) of the Panchayat Samiti, sujangarh a special meeting of the Samiti was summoned on 2-8-68 for filling the aforesaid two vacant posts. The petitioner as well as non- petitioner No. 1 filed nominations and contested election. After counting of votes polled, it was found that both the petitioner and the respondent no. 1 polled equal number of votes. The petitioner was, however, declared duly elected after drawing lot. The election was challenged by respondent No. 1 by preferring an election petition before the learned munsiff inter alia on the ground that the two votes cast in favour of the respondent No. 1 were erroneously rejected by the Presiding Officer.

(3.) THE learned Munsiff opened the ballot papers and scrutinised the two rejected votes. On one of these two votes a mark zero (0) was put against the name of respondent No. 1, while" on the another ballot paper the voter had put a horizontal line in column 3 against the name of respondent No. 1. The Presiding officer rejected these two votes on the ground that the voter did not express his preference for a candidate in accordance with Rule 10 (3) of the Rajasthan panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad (Election of Members of Standing Committee)Rules, 1959. The learned Munsiff, however, took a different view about these rejected votes and held that a voter could express his intention by putting any other mark except cross (X) in favour of a candidate as Rule 11 of the said Rules does not require such votes to be rejected by the Presiding Officer and, therefore, election petition was accepted by the learned Munsiff, Ratangarh and he declared the respondent No. 1 duly elected as a member of the said committee by declaring these two rejected votes as valid votes in favour of the respondent No. 1.