Y. BHASKAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) AND at the stage of admission, this Court passed interim order in W. P. M. P. No. 17388 of 1995 to the effect that the election shall be subject to the result of the writ petition. It is further stated that the District Collector seems to have misunderstood the orders of this Court and did not declare the results. On 24-10-1995, the State Election Commission issued clarification to all the District Collectors to declare the results where no stay is granted by the Court. The contention of the petitioner that recounting is illegal and contrary to the orders of the court, is not correct. The writ petition is not maintainable as the appropriate forum is the Election Tribunal. It is further stated that the process of recounting was conducted as per the guide* lines issued by the State Election Commission, and that the matter pertaining to votes polled, etc. is a pure question of fact which cannot be agitated in writ proceedings. Article 243 (o) bars the jurisdiction of this court to entertain any writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution after the issuance of election notification. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the process of recounting, it is open to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document