Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12529 of 2012 ====================================================== Churaman Yadav Son Of Late Santu Yadav Resident Of Village- Hemant Bigha, P.O. Samaspur, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya Versus .... .... Petitioner/s 1. 1. The Stat Election Commission (Panchayat) through the State Election Commissioner, Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 2. 2. The State Election Commissioner, the State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 3. The Secretary, The State Election Commission (Panchayat), Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna 4. The District Election Officer (Panchayat), Gaya, District- Gaya 5. Anju Devi Widow Of Late Shailendra Kumar Resident of Village- Zafara Tola, Sukaram Bigha, P.O. Siripur P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 6. Awadhesh Yadav Son Of Sri Ambika Yadav Resident Of Village and P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 7. Kamlesh Yadav Son Of Late Lalit Yadav Resident Of Village and P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 8. Kailash Yadav Son Of Late Rameshwar Yadav Resident Of Village- Dariyapur, P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya
Legal Reasoning
9. Janakdhari Chauhan Son Of Sri Bhattu Chauhan Resident Of Village And P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 10. Jitendra Kumar Prabhakar Son Of Sri Sidheshwar Prasad Resident Of Village- Bhagwanpur, P.O. Chandauti, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 11. Nagendra Sharma Son Of Sri Haridwar Sharma Resident Of Village and P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 12. Nivash Kumar Son Of Sri Negendra Yadav Resident Of Village And P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 13. Pawan Paswan Son Of Sri Nagendra Yadav Resident Of Village And P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 14. Pradeep Singh Son Of Late Janak Singh Resident Of Village- Nandi Bigha, P.O. Samaspur, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 15. Prabhat Kumar Verma Son Of Late Satyendra Kumar Verma Resident Of Village And P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 16. Pramod Kumar Son Of Sri Sidheshwar Paswan Resident Of Village and P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 17. Prema Devi Wife Of Brij Nandan Prasad Resident Of Village- Pipra, P.O. Samaspur, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 18. Brajesh Nandan Verma Son Of Late Surendra Prasad Verma Resident Of Village and P.O. Panari, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 19. Rajballabh Prasad Son Of Sri Dargal Prasad Resident Of Village- Zafara Tola, Bhatan Bigha, P.O. Siripur, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 20. Raju Kumar Son Of Sri Ram Awatar Lal Resident Of Village- Zafara, P.O. Siripur, P.S. Belaganj, District- Patna 21. Santosh Kumar Son Of Late Vyas Singh Resident Of Village- Kazi Daulatpur, P.O. Samaspur, P.S. Belaganj, District- Gaya 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.12529 of 2012 (3) dt.21-06-2013 2 / 6 .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar -Mangalam For the Respondent/s : Mr. Amit Shrivastava Mr. Girish Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER 3 21-06-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. No one appears for respondent no.5. The petitioner seeks quashing of the judgment and order dated 29.6.2012 passed by the learned Munsif-III, Gaya in Election Petition No. 02/2011 by which he declared the election of the petitioner void and set it aside and further declared the respondent no. 5 as duly elected candidate for the post of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Panaari under Belaganj Block, District-Gaya. The petitioner, respondent no. 5 and other candidates filed their nomination papers and contested the election for the post of Mukhiya in Gram Panchayat Panari under Belaganj Block of Gaya District in the 2011 Panchayat Elections. The petitioner was declared elected by the Returning Officer after the counting of votes and also started functioning as Mukhiya of the said Gram Panchayat. The respondent no. 5 immediately after 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.12529 of 2012 (3) dt.21-06-2013 3 / 6 the declaration of result, filed a petition before the District Election Officer-cum-District Magistrate, Gaya stating that the Form-20 Part-II has not been prepared in accordance with Form- 20 Part-I as a result of which more votes have been shown in favour of the petitioner and he has wrongly been declared elected as the Mukhiya. Despite the recommendation to that effect made by the District Election Officer (Panchayat)-cum-District Magistrate, Gaya, the State Election Commission having issued the certificate the respondent no. 5 was compelled to file the election petition being Election Petition No. 02/2011 before the Munsif-III, Gaya for setting aside the election of the petitioner and declaring the respondent no. 5 as the elected candidate. The petitioner appeared and filed his written statement raising various pleas but he did not raise any plea regarding Form-20 Part-I having been wrongly prepared and only stated regarding the cuttings made with respect to Form 20 Part II being a deliberate manipulation of the Returning Officer but there was no challenge as to the total number of valid or invalid votes polled with respect to Polling Station Nos. 192 and 194 as mentioned in Form-20 Part-I in the written statement. Upon examination of the materials on the record and the evidence of the parties the learned Munsif- III, Gaya came to the conclusion that the petitioner had wrongly 4 Patna High Court CWJC No.12529 of 2012 (3) dt.21-06-2013 4 / 6 been given 139 votes in place of 37 votes secured by him during the preparation of Form-20 Part-II and thus after subtracting 102 votes excess shown in his favour his total votes of 1023 came down to 921 and the respondent no. 5 having obtained 931 valid votes was thus declared to be an elected candidate after setting aside the election of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner has come to this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has before this Court only sought to argue upon a so called interpolation in Form-20 Part-I with respect to Polling Station Nos. 192 and 194. It is submitted by learned counsel that once those cuttings and over writings were there in Form-20 Part-I then only reasonable way by verifying the veracity of the same was for the Election Tribunal to have made a fresh counting of the votes of those two Polling Stations and the result declared thereafter would have been satisfactory to all concerned including the petitioner. In this regard, learned counsel refers to Section 140 of the Bihar Gram Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 stating that the prescribed authority must arrive at his opinion that in fact the election petitioner or any other candidate has received valid votes by looking into all aspects of the matter and not merely on the statements of the election-petitioner. 5 Patna High Court CWJC No.12529 of 2012 (3) dt.21-06-2013 5 / 6 Learned counsel for the State refers to various findings of the learned Munsif-III, Gaya and submits that those findings are clearly borne out from the materials on the record and thus the judgment and order is not fit to be assailed before this Court. On a consideration of materials on the record and the judgment and order of the Munsif-III, Gaya, I find that the primary issue under consideration was as to whether Form-20 Part-II had been prepared in accordance with Form-20 Part-I. The petitioner did not seriously contest the preparation of Form-20 Part-I by assailing the total number of valid and invalid votes polled and only a reference was made to the cuttings in Form-20 Part-I but there was no plea that there should be recounting of votes of 2 Polling Stations. That being the position, in my view the learned court below in his decision has merely sought to rectify the defect in the preparation of Form-20 Part-II which had not been prepared in terms of Form-20 Part-I and suffered practically from arithmetical error only. Thus the judgment and order of Munsif-III is unassailable. Moreover, since the petitioner had not raised any plea for recounting of the votes of the said two polling stations in his written statement and was merely relying upon the cuttings 6 Patna High Court CWJC No.12529 of 2012 (3) dt.21-06-2013 6 / 6 made in Form-20 Part-I which cuttings at two places with respect to polling station no. 192 and at one place with respect to polling station No. 194 was merely on account of inadvertent error on the part of the person writing down the figures and cannot be a ground for recounting the votes. The writ application is, thus, devoid of merit. It is, accordingly, dismissed. S.Pandey/- (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)