SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(All) 470

P.K.JAIN
RAM PHER – Appellant
Versus
STATE ELECTION COMMISSION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mahendra Pratap, R.K.MISRA

P. K. JAIN, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Sri Mahendra Pratap, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri R. K. Misra, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 and 2 No one appear for remaining respondents.

( 2 ) AN election of Pradhanship was contested between respondent No. 3 and the petitioner and respondents No. 4 to 8. The petitioner was declared elected. Respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 12-C (1) of Panchayat Raj Act challenging the election of the petitioner on various grounds as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition, It appears that during hearing of the election petition a prayer was made before the learned S. D. O. for recounting of the ballots which application was allowed by the impugned order as contained in annexure-7.

( 3 ) THIS order dated 22-6-96 is sough to be quashed through the present writ petition on the ground that there was no material before the learned S. D. O. on the basis of which recounting was necessary. It is submitted that in the election petition no ground was taken from which recounting was permissible. Learned Counsel for the respondent has submitted that in the writ petitio










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top