ORDER

V.K. Mehrotra, J. - General Election to the U.P. Assembly took place in the year 1985. 310 Chhibramau Assembly Constituency was also called upon to elect its Member. The last day for filing nomination was February 6, 1985. The date of poll was March 5, 1985. In between. were the dates for scrutiny of the nominations and for withdrawal. Several persons, including the petitioner Chhotey Singh Yadav, filed their nomination papers for this Constituency. After the scrutiny and withdrawals 16 candidates in all remained in the field. They included the petitioner as well as the first respondent, Sri Santosh, apart from whom 14 more persons were in the fray. They are respondents Nos. 2 to 15 in this writ petition.

2. Polling took place on March 5. Re-poll was ordered by the District Magistrate on filling centres, namely, Polling Stations Nos. 47 and 48 (Dadauna) and 64 and 65 (Jafarabad). Re-poll took place on March 6, 1985. Counting took place on March 6, 1985 and continued till the next day. Sri Santosh, first respondent was declared elected. Santosh is said to have received 28570 votes while petitioner Chhotey Singh Yadav, who polled the next highest number of votes, was said to have obtained 28534 votes. The margin by which he lost the election is of 36 votes.

3. On April 9, 1985 this election petition was presented by Chhotey Singh Yadav in which he has challenged the election of Santosh on the undermentioned three grounds enumerated in paragraph 16 of the petition

"(A) Because the result of the election has been materially affected by non-compliance of the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, Rules and Orders framed therein and also on account of contravention of the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, and the Orders framed thereunder and also issued by the Election Commission from time to time.

(B) Because the result of the election has been materially affected by the improper reception of invalid votes in favour of the Respondent No. 1, by improper refusal of acceptance of valid votes of the petitioner, by improper rejection of valid votes of the petitioner and also by improper reception of invalid votes in favour of other candidates.

(C) Because the Respondent No. 1 was also disqualified for being a candidate for the U.P. Lagislative Assembly inasmuch as he was panel lawyer of Gaon Sabhas in Tehsil Chhibramau appointed by the State Government on remuneration and was holding the office of profit under the State Government of Uttar Pradesh and was thereby disqualified to be a member of U.P. Legislative Assembly under Article 191(1)(a) of the Constitution of India"

4. Concise statement of material facts in respect of these grounds are contained in paragraphs 17, 18 and 19 of the petition. The principal relief sought in the election petition is that after declaring the election of the first respondent to be null and void the petitioner may be declared to be a duly elected member of the Assembly Constituency.

5. On service of notice of the petition upon him, the first respondent Santosh put in appearance. He filed the present application (A-7) on September 17, 1985 praying that certain paragraphs of the election petition be struck off under R. 16 of O. 6 C.P.C. and the petition be dismissed under S. 86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter "the Act") for non-compliance with the provisions of Sections 81, 82 and 117. The application is supported by an affidavit of the first respondent. Chhotey Singh Yadav has filed a counter affidavit in this application.

6. In the election petition the first respondent has filed a written statement. He has also filed a Recriminatory petition under S. 97 of the Act with the prayer that Chhotey Singh Yadav be declared to have committed corrupt practices mentioned in it and be debarred for a period of six years from contesting any election. The Recriminatory petition is duly supported by an affidavit of the first