JUDGMENT :

1. The Court is sitting as a vacation Bench.

2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Akhilesh Singh, Advocate for Respondent-3.

3. Present writ petition is arising out of an election petition filed by Respondent-3, a runner up candidate of election conducted for Village Pradhan of Village Panchayat Bharaul, Tehsil Sirsaganj, District Firozabad. Winning margin in election is eight votes.

4. Election petitioner (Respondent-3) filed an election petition under the provisions of Section 12-C of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1947") on various grounds. Prescribed Authority under Act, 1947, after due service to all respondents, framed following issues :

^^1- D;k pquko izfd;k esa ernku ls nks fnu iwoZ iz/kku in izR;k'kh dh e`R;q gks xbZ Fkh ;fn gka rks izHkko\
2- D;k ernku izfdz;k ds nkSjku Mcy er okys ernkrkvksa }kjk nks&nks ckj ernku fd;k gS ;fn gka rks izHkko\
3- D;k erx.kuk ds nkSjku foi{kh laŒ1 dks ykHk ig¡pkus dh xjt ls xrx.kuk esa /kka/kuh dh xbZ Fkh ;fn gk¡ rks izHkko\
4- D;k pquko fiVh'ku esa of.kZr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij ;kph dh ;kfpdk Lohdkj fd;s tkus ;ksX; gS ;fn gk¡ rks izHkko\
5- D;k xzke iapk;r HkjkSy dh xrnkrk lwfp esa 25 ernkrkvksa ds QthZ oksV cढ+ok, x, gS ftUgksaus HkjkSy xzke iapk;r ds ernku dks izHkkfor fd;k gSA\ ;fn gk¡ rks izHkko\
6- D;k x.kuk ds nkSjku ;kph ds [kM+kÅ pquko fpUg ij yxh eqgj ds 19 erksa dks x.kuk ds nkSjku vf/kdkjh;ksa us x.kuk ds cgkj dj ;kph dks 8 erksa ls tkucw>dj djk;k gS ;fn gk¡ rks izHkko\
7- D;k ;kph ;kfpdk esa of.kZr rF;ksa ds ifjis{; esa iqjkjerx.kuk djk ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS ;fn gk¡ rks izHkko \
8- D;k xzke iapk;r HkjkSy dh ernkrk lwfp esa e`rd ernkrk ds oksVksa dks foyksfor ugha fd;s tkus ls rFkk muds oksV QthZ rjhds ls Mkys tkus ls ernku izHkkfor gqvk gS ;fn gk¡ rks izHkko \^^

5. It appears that petitioner herein (Returned Candidate) has not appeared before Prescribed Authority and no reply was filed to election petition. It also appears that no evidence was called by Prescribed Authority during proceedings.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that Prescribed Authority in impugned order dated 06.04.2023 has not found any merit in election petition qua to issues framed therein including the issue no. 7 regarding recounting and he referred the findings of Prescribed Authority in this regard, which are reproduced as under :

^^fookn foUnq&1 ernku ls nks fnu iwoZ iz/kku in izR;k'kh dh e`R;q gks xbZ Fkh] rks izHkko bl foUnq esa ;g mYys[k ugha fd;k x;k gS fd izR;k'kh fdl ikVhZ ls Fkk ;fn izR;k'kh fdlh ikVhZ ls Fkk rks e`R;q ds mijkar izHkko iM+ ldrk FkkA foUnq laŒ2 Mcy er okys ernkrkvksa }kjk nks&nks ckj ernku fd;k rks izHkkoA foUnq laŒ3 erx.kuk esa /kka/kyh dh xbZ rks bldk izHkko] bu foUnqvksa dk ;kph }kjk dksbZ lk{; izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA foUnq laŒ 5] 6] 7] 8 ij Hkh ;kph }kjk Bksl lk{; izLrqr ugha fd;s x, gSA^^

7. Learned counsel further submits that after the above finding given by Prescribed Authority that all the issues go against election petitioner, only on the ground that all respondents appearing in election petition have no objection if an order for recounting be passed, the Prescribed Authority passed order for recounting of votes. Learned counsel submits that the reasons given by Prescribed Authority are absolutely contrary to the well established law of election petition. He also referred paras 12, 13 and 16 of a judgment passed by this Court in Smt. Sajida vs. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kairana District Shamli and others, 2023 SCC OnLine All 11 and for reference said paragraphs are mentioned hereinafter :

"12. It is well settled that it is important to maintain secrecy of ballot which is sacrosanct and it should not be allowed to be violated on frivolous, vague and indefinite allegations and before inspection is allowed, the allegations made against elected candidate must be clear and specific and must be supported by adequate statements of material facts (See, Bhabhi vs. Sheo Govind and others, AIR 1975 SC 2217 and Ram Sewa