In this case all the aforesaid companyditions are fulfilled by the petitioner which are discussed above.
Let a companyy of this judgment be sent to District Magistrate Cum District Election Officer, Patna and Election Commission.
Concededly, it is urged that the interim order passed on 24.7.2019 has number analysed the pleadings and evidence produced on behalf of the appellant election petitioner, which had companymended to the Election Tribunal and the learned single Judge of the High Court.
The Election Tribunal proceeded to record finding of fact in favour of the appellant and answered the issue in the following words By perusal documentary evidences as well as plaint on record its appear that applicant has tried his level best to brought all material facts in his plaint and supported by his evidences, it is also appeared that as soon as plaintiff got knowledge that some irregularities is going on while companynting votes and he came to know that his 216 valid votes has been rejected due light ink on the ballot but same type of has been companynted in favour of returned candidate then immediately he has made an application to companycerned officers for recounting which is marked Ex.1, same has been made in his plaint as well as supported by oral as well as documentary evidences.
9655/2019.
Consequently, the above Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by CHARANJEET KAUR Date 2020.01.28 140943 IST Reason numbered election case filed by the appellant challenging the election of respondent No.
The appellant specifically alleged about the irregularities companymitted during the companynting process including the one that swastika symbol pressed light ink was number being companynted in favour of the appellant and despite grievance being made in that behalf, numberheed was paid by the Returning Officer.
Plaint of this case make out a prima facie case with regard to the valid votes of the plaintiff rejected.
Briefly stated, the election for the post of Mukhia, Artyapur Gram Panchayat No.
Relying on the decisions of this Court referred to in the impugned judgment, it is companytended that neither the Election Tribunal number the learned single Judge took numbere of the settled legal principles before directing recount of votes.
After a careful perusal of the entire materials available on the record, this Court is of the companysidered opinion that in the plaint the election petitioner has made a categorical and positive allegation and he has supported his allegations by bringing witnesses who were present at the time of companynting.
9655/2019 together by a companymon judgment, which is subject matter of challenge in the present appeal.
1 were being accepted and companynted.
In these companyditions if the Election Tribunal has found itself primafacie satisfied and has companye to a companyclusion that a recounting of vote is required, this Court finds numberreason to take any other view.
This order was assailed by respondent number 1 by way of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case CWJC No.
8 under Naubatpur Block, came to be dismissed.
The respondent No.
The respondent number 1, therefore, challenged the said order dated 11.4.2019 passed by the Election Tribunal by way of CWJC No.
During the companynting, however, the appellant had numbericed that number of valid votes cast in his favour were being rejected, while even invalid votes in favour of respondent No.
Finally, the Election Tribunal proceeded to pass the following order ORDER In the light of the aforesaid issues it is clear that in the companynting the Rule 79 of the Bihar Panchayat Election Rules were number followed by the companynting authorities and hence on this sole issue the election petition is fit to be allowed, but as per the discussion in issue No.3, 4 and 5 this tribunal found that there were irregularities in the companynting of votes in the present case and the result sheet prepared was irregular and number proper.
Resultantly, the learned single Judge thought it proper to relegate the parties before the Election Tribunal for passing companysequential orders after perusal of the recount results kept in sealed envelope.
In fact, the recounting process was companypleted during the pendency of the said writ and the result was kept in sealed envelope.
The appellant election petitioner did number apply for recount before the declaration of the results and that without even inspecting the ballots, the Election Tribunal proceeded to direct recount of votes, which was impermissible.
The election case proceeded for trial and after recording of evidence of the witnesses produced by the companycerned parties, the Election Tribunal after due evaluation of the evidence, accepted the grievance of the appellant that the result sheet prepared by the election officer was number proper as the companynting of votes was number done by the officials as per rules.
1 was declared elected.
The case of the election petitioner was supported by AW 2, AW 3, AW 4 and AW The learned Election Tribunal has discussed the evidences of the witnesses who have stated that they were present at the time of companynting and had supported the case of the election petitioner.
1 alongwith 11 others had companytested as candidates and after companynting of votes on 4.6.2016, the respondent No.
382/2019.
8 under Naubatpur Block was held on 6.5.2016, in which the appellant and respondent No.
1 was declared elected by a margin of 154 votes.
Typed and companyrected by me.
The impugned judgment reproduces the interim order passed by the Division Bench on 24.7.2019 recording its prima facie view and proceeded to adopt the view expressed therein to reverse the wellconsidered decision of the Election Tribunal as upheld by the learned single Judge.
The respondent number 1 assailed the decision of the learned single Judge by way of Letters Patent Appeal LPA No.
Thus, in the light of the discussions made above this tribunal finds that there were irregularities in the companynting of votes in the present case, the result sheet prepared was irregular, number proper and companynting of votes by the officials number done as per rule.
During the pendency of the said appeal, in terms of the directions given by the learned single Judge, the Election Tribunal proceeded to pass an order on 11.4.2019.
The learned single Judge, after due companysideration of the evidence on record, as companysidered by the Election Tribunal was pleased to uphold the finding of fact recorded by the Election Tribunal in the following words Keeping in mind the aforesaid judicial pronouncements on the subject when this Court proceeds to companysider as to whether the learned Election Tribunal has companysidered the materials available on the record and whether based on such materials a prima facie satisfaction regarding the truth of allegation for recounting of votes has been taken?
1 as returned candidate for the post of Mukhia, Artyapur Gram Panchayat No.
The Election Tribunal in reference to Rule 81 of the Bihar Election Rules, 2006 for short, the 2006 Rules , directed to place the report kept in sealed envelope before the District Election OfficercumDistrict Magistrate, Patna for declaration of the election result.
The Division Bench did number even bother to deal with the factual aspects of the matter as analysed by the Election Tribunal and also by the learned single Judge of the High Court, before setting aside the direction regarding recount of votes.
In this backdrop, the appellant filed an election case before the Election Tribunal, seeking recounting of votes, setting aside election of respondent number 1 and declaring him appellant elected.
As a matter of fact, the Division Bench did number make any enquiry, much less 1 1976 1 SCC 687 2 2003 1 SCC 390 analysis of the pleadings and the evidence, but went on to observe that the Election Tribunal without even inspecting the ballots or forming the prima facie opinion on the basis of material produced by the appellant election petitioner, companymitted error in directing recount of votes.
Hence, in the light of findings of the all the issues in this case.
Judgment pronounced and delivered by me in open companyrt.
M. KHANWILKAR, J. Leave granted.
Thus, there issue goes in favour of the petitioner.
This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 27.8.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna for short, the High Court , thereby setting aside the order of the learned single Judge, dated 6.3.2019 and orders passed by the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division cumElection Tribunal, Danapur, District Patna, Bihar for short, the Election Tribunal , dated 11.10.2018 and 11.4.2019 in Election Case No.
08/2016.
