Election votes cannot be canceled based on presumptions; specific statutory grounds must be met, emphasizing the importance of relevant procedures and rules in election disputes.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.

The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging a Speaking Order dated 30.08.2025, issued by the District Commissioner, Barpeta, whereby, the vote of the petitioner no. 2 qua the election to the post of President of the 91 No. Agmandia Jadavpur Gaon Panchayat (Gaon Panchayat) has been cancelled.

2. As per the facts projected, the two petitioners along with the respondent no. 7 are amongst the elected members of the aforesaid Gaon Panchayat. After the said election was held, there was a requirement to elect the President of the said Gaon Panchayat in which, the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 7 had offered their candidatures. The meeting for such election was scheduled on 04.07.2025 which was, however, rescheduled on 14.07.2025. In the said meeting, both the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no. 7 had secured 5 (five) votes each and therefore, there was a requirement to elect the President by toss of coin which is provided in Rule 45 of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1995). However, the vote of the petitioner no. 2 was cancelled and resultantly, the respondent no.7 was elected as the President.

3. The petitioners had thereafter approached this Court by fling WP(C)/3991/2025. This Court vide order dated 21.07.2025 had directed the petitioners to approach the District Commissioner by filing a representation, who, accordingly was directed to consider the same in accordance with law. For ready reference, the operative part of the direction is extracted hereinbelow:

“7. In view of the statutory prescription made for resolving a dispute pertaining to the election to the post of President of a Gaon Panchayat in the provisions of the Act of 1994, this Court without entering into the merits of the submissions made by the petitioner herein, requires the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional District Commissioner, Assam, by way of submitting a representation assailing the election of the respondent no. 8 as the President of 91 No. Agmandia Jadavpur Gaon Panchayat, within a period of 7(seven) days from today.

8. On receipt of such representation from the petitioner, the jurisdictional District Commissioner shall schedule a date of hearing in the matter and issue notices to the petitioner, respondent no. 7 and other stakeholders involved in the matter. Thereafter, the jurisdictional District Commissioner, upon hearing the parties to the proceeding and also on receiving evidences as may be adduced by the parties, shall pass orders with regard to the grievance raised by the petitioner in the representation now required to be filed by the petitioner.

9. The petitioner shall file the said representation before the jurisdictional District Commissioner along with a certified copy of this order.

10. The jurisdictional District Commissioner shall thereafter, dispose of the said representation in the manner indicated herein above, within a period of 30 (thirty) days thereafter.”

4. In terms of the aforesaid direction, the petitioners had submitted a representation on 23.07.2025. After consideration of the same, the impugned Speaking Order has been passed on 30.08.2025 by the District Commissioner, Barpeta, cancelling the vote of the petitioner no.2. It is this action which has been put to challenge in the present writ petition.

5. I have heard Shri H.A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri S. Dutta, learned Standing Coun