The Sub Divisional Officer, therefore, companyrected the mistake by Order dated 3rd February, 2000 and declared the Appellant to have won the election.
1 filed a Writ Petition in the High Court.
Respondent number 1 evaded services.
On a recounting of the votes it was found that the Appellant had won.
The Sub Divisional Officer thereafter heard all parties and again passed an order to recount.
The 1st Respondent again filed a Writ Petition before the High Court.
After the companynting of the votes, the Appellant was orally informed that he had won the elections.
This matter was, therefore, directed to be placed before a three Judge Bench.
However when the result was officially declared, Respondent No.
By an ex parte Order the Sub Divisional Officer directed recounting of ballot papers.
On a second recount it was again found that the votes polled in favour of the Appellant had been erroneously shown as having been polled in favour of Respondent No.
The Appellant, therefore, filed an election petition before the Sub Divisional Officer.
Thus the Sub Divisional Officer again companyrected the results and declared the Appellant as having won the elections.
Against the order of the Sub Divisional Officer, Respondent No.
In the Impugned Judgment, the High Court has followed a decision of this Court in the case of Smt.
On 23rd February, 2000 the High Court disposed of the Writ Petition by remanding the matter back to Sub Divisional Officer.
On such recounting it was found that in respect of booth number 151 the votes polled in favour of the Appellant had been erroneously shown as having been polled in favour of Respondent No.
The Returning Officer then issued a certificate showing that Respondent number 1 had won.
1 was shown to have won.
N. VARIAVA, J. Leave granted.
These Appeals are against the judgment dated 27th March, 2001.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows On 20th January, 2000 the election for the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Ringnodiya, Indore was held.
