UDEY CHAND versus SURAT SINGH AND ANR.

UDEY CHAND versus SURAT SINGH AND ANR.

Order for recount under section 176(4)(b) of Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 requires adequate material facts and evidence in the election petition; absence thereof renders recount order improper and mechanical. Mere narrow margin of votes does not justify recount. Tribunal and High Court erred in law by allowing recount based solely on vague allegations without material facts or evidence.

Parties
Appellant: Udey Chand; Respondent No.1/election Petitioner: Surat Singh; Respondent No.2: Unknown (Returning Officer)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of High Court Affirming Election Tribunal Order, Special Leave Appeal Before Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of Tribunal directing recount set aside; election petition rejected.
Legal Topics
Election Petition, Re Counting of Votes, Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Secrecy of Ballot, Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal
Election Law Election Petition Re Counting of Votes Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 Secrecy of Ballot Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Udey Chand

Appellant

Surat Singh

Respondent No.1/election Petitioner

Unknown (Returning Officer)

Respondent No.2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of High Court Affirming Election Tribunal Order, Special Leave Appeal Before Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Election Tribunal was justified in ordering recounting of votes under section 176(4)(b) of Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 based on vague allegations and no material facts or evidence
  2. 2 Whether mere narrow margin of votes justifies recount
  3. 3 Whether failure to avail statutory remedy precludes relief in election petition

Ratio Decidendi

Order for recount under section 176(4)(b) of Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 requires adequate material facts and evidence in the election petition; absence thereof renders recount order improper and mechanical. Mere narrow margin of votes does not justify recount. Tribunal and High Court erred in law by allowing recount based solely on vague allegations without material facts or evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of Tribunal directing recount set aside; election petition rejected.

Orders

  • Order of Election Tribunal directing recount of votes is set aside.
  • Election petition rejected.