( 1 ) THIS petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 5-8-1996.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was elected as Pradhan of a Gaon Sabha and respondent No. 1 filed an election petition which is pending. By the impugned order, recount of the voles has been challenged in this petition.

( 3 ) A perusal of the impugned order dated 5-8-1996 shows that while the petitioner polled 475 votes, respondent No. 1 polled 472 votes. Thus there is a narrow margin of three votes.

( 4 ) NO doubt as hold by the Supreme Court in AIR 1980 SC 206, narrow margin of votes would not by itself justify recounting but the same decision also states that this is a fact which can be taken into consideration while deciding whether to order a recount. In the present case, not only is there a narrow margin of votes but this is also coupled with the fact that earlier the respondent no. 1 was declared elected. Hence both these facts together, in my opinion, justify the order of recount.

( 5 ) THUS there is no merit in this petition. The writ petition is dismissed.

.