Minor irregularities in election procedures do not justify overturning results unless they materially affect the election outcome, as demonstrated in the representation of people act.

CAV ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA)

Heard Sri Nishanth A.V., learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vivek Subba Reddy, learned Senior Advocate along with Sri Dilli Rajan, advocate for respondent No.1.

2. Unsuccessful candidate from Kumta Constituency in the General Elections to 16^th Legislative Assembly of Karnataka, 2023, is the petitioner challenging the declaration made by the Returning Officer declaring respondent No.1 as winning candidate, in the present petition filed under Section 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 , hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’.

3. Facts of the case in a nutshell are as under:

General Elections to 16^th Legislative Assembly of Karnataka, 2023, was announced by the Election Commission of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘ECI’) on 29.03.2023. Pursuant to said announcement, Hon’ble Governor of Karnataka called upon Electorate in Karnataka to elect the members of Legislative Assembly and a notification came to be issued under the provisions of the Act.

4. Pursuant to the notification and calendar of events, elections were conducted as per the Act and Rules made thereunder. The calendar of events is culled out hereunder for ready reference.

5. For Kumta Assembly Constituency No.78, Sri Raghavendra B. Jagalasar, was appointed as Returning Officer who was working as Assistant Commissioner, Kumta Sub Division, Uttara Kannada District. Under the powers conferred on him, he appointed Assistant Returning Officers by name Sri Raviraj Dixit who was working as Tahsildar, Honnavar Taluk and Sri Shivayogi Naikalmath, who was working as Tahsildar, Kumta Taluk. Election was conducted under the direction and supervision of the Returning Officer.

6. Petitioner contested on the ticket of political party Janatha Dal (Secular) (‘JD(S) for short). Respondent No.1 contested the election on the ticket of political party – Bharatiya Janatha Party (‘BJP’ for short).

7. Apart from petitioner and respondent No.1, there are seven other respondents who contested to the Kumta Assembly Constituency No.78.

8. In the said election, respondent No.1 was declared elected by defeating the petitioner by a margin of 676 votes. Authenticated copy in Form 21C was issued. Form 21E was also issued. The election was conducted by using Electronic Voting Machine (‘EVM’ for short).

9. After voting, as per the calendar of events referred to supra, counting was conducted on 13.05.2023 in Dr.A.V.Baliga College of Arts and Science, Kumta.

10. In the ground floor of the said college, counting of EVM took place, whereas, in the first floor, postal ballots were counted. As required under the Act and Rules, each counting table had a Counting Supervisor, two Counting Assistants and other assisting staffs for counting of votes recorded in the EVMs.

11. In the first floor, postal ballots were counted at the first instance in due compliance with Rule 54A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 . In all, 2,243 postal ballots consisting of home voters, service voters etc., were counted. Among them, 301 ballot papers were rejected and 1942 ballot papers which were valid were counted. Petitioner contends that rejection of ballot votes which were valid and casted in his favour, is contrary to Rule 54A of the Conduct of Election R