The rejection of votes on the ground of wrong signatures of the Presiding Officer is illegal if the ballot papers were signed by the Presiding Officer appointed for the polling station.

, J.

1. The petitioner has impugned the order of the Appellate Authority under Sec.13-V of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1953 (for short, the Act) in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. Reference to a few relevant facts is necessary to appreciate the point of law arising for adjudication. Election for the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Village Bahu Akbarpur, Tehsil and District Rohtak was held on August 18, 1988. The petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4 were the candidates for the office of Sarpanch in that election. The number of votes polled in favour of these three contestants was as under : -Votes obtained Votes cancelled Valid Votes Petitioner 1587 26 1561 Respondent No.3 1585 12 1573 Respondent No.4 1192 19 1172 -------------- -------------- -----------4363 57 4306 Respondent No.3 was declared elected. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the election of respondent No.3 before the prescribed authority under the Act. The order of the prescriled authority was upheld on appeal by the Appellate Authority.

3. The principal grouse of the petitioner was that the valid votes polled in his favour were wrongly rejected. The Appellate Authority arrived at the following finding :-

"in view of my detailed discussion above, in my opinion, the Returning Officer had rightly rejected the 22 votes cast in favour of Bhim Singh appellant as the same were bearing the signatures of other Presiding Officers order than the Presiding Officers of the relevant booths and as Such the said votes were liable to be rejected under Rule 34 (b) of the Rules. Similarly, one vote which was not having the signatures of the Presiding Officer at all and was not having any other distinguished mark, in my opinion, was also liable to be rejected in view of the provisions of Rule 34 (b) of the Rules. Furthermore, the remaining 3 votes which were meant for the use for the election of Panches, in my opinion, were also liable to be rejected as the present election pertained to the office of Sarpanch. " The Appellate Authority held that 22 votes cast in favour of the petitioner were validly rejected since these votes bore signatures of the Presiding Officers other than the Presiding Officers of the relevant booths in which these votes were cast and consequently these votes were liable to be rejected under Rule 34 (2) of the Haryana Gram Panchayat Election Rules, 1971 (for short, the Rules), If these votes were validly rejected, the order of the Appellate Authority is unexceptional.

4 The learned counsel for the petitioner maintains that these 22 votes polled in favour of the petitioner have been rejected on wholly illegal grounds. In order to appreciate the submission, a brief reference to the relevant rules is necessary. Rule 15 of the Rules provides that where in the Sabha area there is only one polling station, the Returning Officer shall act as Presiding Officer for conducting the poll and if in a Sabha area where there are more than one polling stations the Deputy Commissioner shall appoint a Presiding Officer for each polling station to conduct the poll. The Deputy Commissioner shall also appoint polling officers and polling assistants to assist the Polling Officer. The Presiding Officer shall, in addition to performing any other duties imposed upon him by these rules, be in general charge of all arrangement at the polling station. Rule 16 of the Rules provides that the Director may direct that before any ballot-paper is delivered to a voter at a polling station, it shall be marked with such official mark as may be specified by him in this behalf and the official mark shall be kept secret Rule 34 relates to rejection of votes. It provides that a ballot paper shall be rejected, if (a) it bears any mark or writing by which the voter can be identified (b) in the case, where a direction has been issued under Rule 16 that the ballot paper shall contain an official mark it does not contain an official mark; and (c) th