R.S.PATHAK, SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE
Krishna Ballabh Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sub-divisional Officer Hilsa-cum-returning Officer – Respondent
Judgment
PATHAK, J.:- The petitioner and the fourth respondent contested an election to the Bihar Legislative Assembly seat from the Islampur Assembly Constituency in March, 1985. After the votes had been polled, the counting of votes was taken up on March 6, 1985. Pursuant to allegations made by the parties, the Election Commission of India ordered re-polling in sixty stations. On the conclusion of the re-poll the votes were counted and the petitioner was found to have secured more votes than the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent applied for a recount of the votes but the Returning Officer rejected the application and announced that the petitioner had been duly elected to the Assembly. A certificate of election in Form 22 under Rule 66 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, was granted to the petitioner. It seems that the declaration in Form 21C was not prepared under Clause (a) of Rule 64 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, and sent to the authorities required thereunder. The Returning Officer, on discovering that the ballot papers of one booth had not been counted, took those votes into account and thereafter issued a notice cancelling the election of the petitioner a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.