The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for cooperation and maintaining dignity during the counting process in the context of a club election dispute.

K.S. Jhaveri, J.

Rule. Learned counsel for the respondents waive service of rule.

1. We have heard Mr. Kamal Trivedi learned Senior Advocate, Mr. S.I. Nanavati learned Senior Advocate appearing with Ms. Anuja Nanavati, Mr. Mihir Thakore learned Senior Advocate, Mr. R.S. Sanjanwala learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Shalin Mehta learned Senior Advocate and learned Advocate Mr. C.B. Upadhyaya.

2. With the consent of the parties concerned, the matter is taken up for final disposal today. When the matter was earlier listed before this Court on 03.03.2015, the following order was passed;

“ORDER IN OJ APPEAL:

Notice returnable on 25.03.2015.

ORDER IN OJCA:

With consent of Senior advocates appearing for the parties, the following order is passed:-

1. Rule returnable on 25.03.2015.

2. Mr. Justice D.A. Mehta, Retired Judge, High Court of Gujarat is appointed as an Observer to observe as well as take decisions on all issues arising out of the Election and his decision shall remain final and binding to all concerned.

3. Justice Mehta will be intimating to the Club to make appointment of such persons to render him the necessary assistance for the aforesaid purpose.

4. He will be making the appointment of Stenographer, Clerk, Peon as per his requirement and remuneration fixed by him shall be paid by the Club to such appointees.

5. Justice Mehta will be provided transportation by the Club which shall be a hired vehicle by the club.

6. The remuneration for Mr. Justice Mehta will be paid by the Club which shall be Rs. 5 Lacs.

7. Neither interested candidates nor any other supporters shall make any propaganda or representation to anyone that such appointment of the Observer is made at their instance and/or at their request.

8. The Application made by the Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 before the Company Law Board for certain directions, which is coming up for hearing on 05.03.2015 will not be pressed or it will be withdrawn.

9. Liberty to either of parties to move for any further direction/order, if it is felt necessary.

Direct service is permitted.”

3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the learned Observer appointed by this Court submitted an Interim Report on 24.03.2015, which has been taken on record. It is reflected from the said Report that after the polling process was over, initially, the respondent group sought participation by its candidates and/or their representatives during the counting process by one person remaining present at every counting table. When this was turned down, both the groups were ready and willing to watch the process of counting from a distance. However, after the polling was over, learned advocates from both the sides approached the learned Observer and once again reiterated participation by the candidates and/or their representatives. The learned Observer, therefore, devised a system whereby five representatives from each group would be permitted to watch the counting process from outside the perimeter set up for counting purposes. The said system was acceptable, as conveyed by the learned Advocates initially. But, just when the counting was to commence, some of the candidates stated that they were not agreeable to the aforesaid arrangement because they did not belong to any group (panel) as such and wanted to remain present themselves with one representative each on each of the counting tables. Considering the fact that 6,483 ballot papers have been used, each ballot paper containing 60 names of the candidates contesting the election, a voter has to cast his votes to elect 30 members, the total count would come to 1,94,490 votes. Under Rule 21(1)(k) of the Rules, the Scrutinizers' Report requires to state the total votes cast, valid votes, votes in favour and against the resolution including the details of invalid polling papers and votes comprised therein. Thus, in effect, the aforesaid count of 1,94,490 would get doubled while preparing the final election result. In the aforesaid set of circumstances, as the parties were not amenabl