JUDGMENT

Bharucha, J.-The issue in the appeals and in the special leave petition is the correctness of the result, as declared, of the election to the post of Adhyaksha/President of the Zila Parishad, Shahjahanpur. The election was held under the provisions of the U.P. Zila Parishads (Election of Adhyaksha and Up-Adhyaksha and Settlement of Election Disputes) Rules, 1963 framed under the provisions of Section 237 of the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961. Rule 26 of the said Rules states that Schedule II thereof sets out the instructions for determining the result of elections.

2. The candidates at the concerned election, held on 22nd May, 1995, were Jivendra, Manvendra and Smt. Gayatri Verma. There were 31 electors, all of whom voted. Jivendra got 10 first preference votes, Manvendra got 14 first preference votes and Gayatri got 7 first preference votes. By reason of the provisions of Schedule II to the said Rules the quota for securing a result was 16, which none of the three candidates secured. Gayatri having secured the lowest number of first preference votes, was eliminated and the second preference votes on her ballot papers were considered. Jivendra got 5 more votes and Manvendra got 1 more. This meant that the number of votes secured on the second count by Jivendra and Manvendra was 15 each. Accordingly, the Returning Officer decided to draw lots, and by reason thereof Jivendra was declared elected.

3. Manvendra filed an election petition challenging Jivendra s election. The election petition succeeded and appeals therefrom were filed before the High Court. The maintainability of the appeals was challenged in proceedings with which we are not concerned. Ultimately, the High Court was required to hear and decide the appeals on their merits. The High Court, on a construction of Schedule II, noted that neither Jivendra nor Manvendra had, on the second count, secured the quota of 16. It held that no lots could have been drawn; also that Manvendra could not be declared as elected on the basis that he had secured a larger number of first preference votes for the reason that he had been unable to secure the mandatory quota. Accordingly, the High Court declared that a casual vacancy in the office of the Adhyaksh had been created.

4. What is called for is an analysis of Schedule II. The relevant portion thereof may be quoted :

"2. Ascertain the number of first preference votes secured by each candidate and credit him with that number.

3. Add up the numbers so credited to all the candidates, divide the total by two and add one to the quotient disregarding any remainder The resulting number is the quota sufficient to secure the return of candidates at the election.

4(1). If there are only two contesting candidates then :

(a) If one candidate gets larger number of first preference votes than the other, declare the former as elected; or

(b) If both the candidates get equal number of first preference votes, determine the result by drawing of lots. Exclude the candidate on whom the lot falls and declare the other candidates as elected.

(2) If there are more than two candidates, then-

(a) If one of them is found to secure first preference votes equal to or more than the quota determined under Instruction No. 3, declare him as elected; or

(b) If none of them secure first preference votes equal to or more than the quota aforesaid proceed according to the instruction hereinafter taking into consideration second and subsequent preferences as may be necessary.

5. If at the end of the first or any subsequent count of the total number of votes credited to any candidate is equal to or greater than the quota or there is only one continuing candidate, that candidate is declared elected.

6. If at the end of any count, no candidate can be declared elected :

(a) exclude the candidate who up to that stage has been credited with the lowest