AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.:–Heard Mr. Harendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Amit Shrivastava, along with Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, learned counsel for the State Election Commission; Mr. Ramadhar Singh, learned GP-25 for the State and Mr. S. B. K. Mangalam, learned counsel for the respondent no. 7. Despite notice to the remaining private respondents, nobody appeared on their behalf when the matter was heard.

2. At the very outset, before making submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner expressed his apology on behalf of the petitioner and sought permission to delete paragraph no. 15.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents do not object.

4. In view thereof, permission is granted and the said paragraph no. 15 of the writ petition stands expunged.

5. The petitioner has moved the Court seeking the following reliefs:—

“(1) quashing the Memo no.-Panchayat Nirvachan 30-110/2016-5175 Patna dated 09.06.2016 (Annexure-6) issued by and under the signature of the respondent no.- 6 whereby and whereunder the polling held on Booth No. -257 and 258 of Pradeshik Nirvachan Kshetra Sankhaya-25 (Baheri 8/3) for the post of Zila Parishad Sadasya has been cancelled and has ordered for holding repoll on 15.06.2016 on both the said booths (ii) and for commanding the respondents authorities to declare the result of said Pradeshik Nirvachan Kshetra Sankhya-25 (Baheri-8/3) (Inshort the Constituency) for the post of Zila Parishad Sadasya on the basis of the polling held on 06.05.2016 by issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) and / or direction(s) in the following facts and circumstances of the case.”

6. The petitioner, along with respondents no. 7 to 17, contested for the post of member of Darbhanga Zila Parishad from Pradeshik Nirvachan Kshetra Sankhya-25 (Baheri 8/3) for which election was held on 06.05.2016, as per the fixed schedule. The counting for the said constituency was started on 05.06.2016 and continued till 07.06.2016. However, with regard to Booths No. 257 and 258 in Baghauni Gram Panchayat, having a total of 707 and 601 voters respectively, it was detected that out of the 392 polled in Booth No. 257 and 425 in Booth No. 258, 320 ballot papers of Booth No. 257 and 394 ballot papers of Booth No. 258 had wrong printing of the name of the constituency and the name of the candidates. The same being detected after counting in the remaining 90 Booths had been completed and known, the local authorities communicated the factual position to the State Election Commission and after deliberation, the State Election Commission directed for re-poll on the said two Booths. However, by order dated 15.06.2016, there was a stay of declaration of the result of the fresh election on the said two Booths which was to be held on that day.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the State Election Commission has unnecessarily interfered in the matter by directing for re-poll as this was a plain and simple case where such ballot papers which had the wrong constituency name as well as the name of the candidates, were to be rejected in terms of Rule 75 of the Bihar Panchayat Election Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’). Learned counsel submitted that specifically Rule 75(1)(h) deals with such a situation where there may be error with regard to the name of the candidate or candidates, serial number and symbol allotted to a candidate as recorded in Form 9. He submitted that once such ballot papers were detected which had such printing error, the only recourse under law for the Returning Officer was to reject such ballot papers and nothing further was required to be done. Learned counsel submitted that this not being done itself was improper and further, the matter being referred to the State Election Commission was not required. It was further submitted that the State Election Commission, in turn ordering for re-poll was totally beyond jurisdiction and impermissible i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document