Back
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, PARTHA SARTHY
State Election Commission (Panchayat) Sone Bhawan, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna through the State Election Commissioner – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. Vinod Chandran, CJ.
The writ petition is placed along with the LPA by virtue of an order passed by the learned Single Judge. The order impugned in the writ petition is a direct consequence of the order impugned in the appeal. Hence, we heard the appeal first.
2. The appeal is filed by the State Election Commission (Panchayat) against the directions issued by the learned Single Judge to the Election Tribunal constituted under the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act to consider the validity of the re-polling conducted on the ground of defect in one of the Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) with respect to Booth No. 213. The Election Tribunal on the directions issued in the impugned order in appeal interfered with the re-polling in which the 4th respondent was declared elected. The writ petition is filed against the order of the Election Tribunal. We refer to the parties from the appeal.
3. The issue agitated is with respect to the re-polling in one of the booths, in an election conducted for the post of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat, Gangwara Bujurg. The election as scheduled was initially conducted on 12.12.2021 in all the 13 booths. The 5th respondent in the appeal obtained 1073 votes as ag
The court held that election challenges must be made through an Election Petition filed within the statutory period, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural requirements.
Recounting of votes requires a prima facie case supported by cogent evidence; mere differences in vote counts do not justify recounting.
The secrecy of the ballot is sacrosanct, and a recount of votes should only be ordered based on specific and proven allegations, following the prescribed procedure.
Election petitions must adhere to statutory procedures for recounting; failure to comply invalidates recount orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between interlocutory orders and final orders under Section 12-C(6) of the U.P. Panchayati Raj Act, 1947, and the availability of t....
The Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to election petitions under the U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Act, and petitions filed beyond the specified timeframe are not maintainable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
