The main legal point established is that for a recounting order to be valid, the evidence and pleadings in support of the claim for recounting must be complete and substantiated by the record.

Satyendra Singh Chauhan,J. –

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.3.

2. Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.1.2013.

3. The election for the office of Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Dadra, Block and Tehsil Musafirkhana, District Amethi was held on 15.10.2010, in which the petitioner and opposite party nos.3 to 16 were the contesting candidates. After conclusion of polling, counting was done on 28.10.2010 and after counting, result was declared on the same day. Opposite party no.3 filed election petition on 20.1.2011, challenging the election of the petitioner, inter alia, on the ground that counting was not done properly and there was irregularity in counting. The issues were framed on 11.7.2011. The opposite party no.3 examined himself and one Sandeep Singh in support of his case, proved the contents of the election petition and the facts stated therein. The petitioner i.e. defendant no.1 in the election petition examined himself and one Ranveer Singh and stated that no irregularity was committed in recounting. However, on demand made by opposite party no.3, recounting was done by the returning officer in which, no illegality was found. Further, the parties adduced their evidence in support of their claim and after considering the evidence of the parties i.e. petitioner and opposite party no.3, the prescribed authority passed an order for recounting of votes on 2.1.2013 fixing 8.1.2013 for recounting. The said order has been challenged in this writ petition.

4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that merely on the basis of discrepancy in form nos. 11 and 6 of booth nos. 17 and 23, no recounting could have been ordered. The opposite party no.3 was supposed to lead specific evidence in support of his pleading and as and when, pleading was complete and evidence adduced thereof was sufficient to make out the case for recounting, only then recounting could have been ordered. He has placed reliance upon the judgment in the cases of Mahendra Pal vs. Shri Ram Dass Malanger and others 2002(20) LCD 993 and Amit Narain Rai vs. State of U.P. and others (2012) 2 UPLBEC 1582 .

5. Learned counsel for opposite parties, on the other hand, has submitted that in Para-(Ya) of the election petition, it has been specifically pleaded that while Appendix-4 was being prepared, after scrutiny and after preparation of lot of votes received of elected and other candidates, the total polled votes were 439, but 441 votes were found in the said ballot box. An objection was raised to the said discrepancy and it was assured that it will be taken care of, after counting is over. He further submits that in booth no.13, there were total 13 invalid votes, but despite of objection of the petitioner, three invalid votes which were kept in the bundle of doubtful votes, were taken out and they were put in the bundle of the petitioner and thereafter Appendix-4 was prepared. Objection was also raised by the election agent of the petitioner, namely, Vinay prakash, but the same was not entertained. Learned counsel further submits that the pleadings in respect of invalid votes were complete and opposite party no.3 also appeared and proved the aforesaid fact. In the cross examination, nothing was asked from opposite party no.3 in respect of the aforesaid pleadings and rather it was avoided by the petitioner. In Examination in Chief, opposite party no.3 has specifically stated that three votes were illegally included in the votes of the petitioner, on account of which, he was declared elected.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. The election for the office of Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Dadra, Block and Tehsil Musafirkhana, District Amethi was held on 15.10.2010, in which the petitioner and opposite party nos.3 to 16 were the contesting candidates. After conclusion of polling, counting was done on 28.10