Gujarat High Court
Bhanita Chetankumar Patel vs Rajshri Vijaykumar Kesari & 5 on 17 December, 2015
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Mohinder Pal
C/SCA/20439/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20439 of 2015
==========================================================
BHANITA CHETANKUMAR PATEL....Petitioner(s)
Versus
RAJSHRI VIJAYKUMAR KESARI & 5....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR C B UPADHYAYA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL
Date : 17/12/2015
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. The petitioner has challenged an order dated 14.12.2015 passed by the Election Tribunal refusing to grant interim injunction as prayed by the petitioner. Petitioner had contested the election to Ward No.3 of Chandkheda of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. According to the petitioner, the result declared by the Returning Officer was flawed on count of miscalculation of votes. Instead of the petitioner who had actually polled highest number of votes, respondent No.1 was declared elected. The petitioner, therefore, filed election petition before the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad. Along with the petition, petitioner also prayed for interim injunction to restrain the respondent No.1 from taking over charge as elected councilor during the pendency of the election petition. This application came to be dismissed by the learned Judge Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Fri Dec 18 02:35:16 IST 2015 C/SCA/20439/2015 ORDER by the impugned order.
2. Once result of election is declared, it would be in exceptional circumstances, if at all permissible, for the election tribunal to stay the result of the election. A member who contested and is declared duly elected cannot be without strong reasons prevented from discharging the functions as elected representative of the people. The effect of granting injunction would be to suspend the outcome of the completed election.
3. In the present case, however, case of the petitioner is that there is a simple error in not properly taking into account the tally of total votes of the respective candidates which has resulted into this error. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the evidence on behalf of the petitioner is extremely short. In view of such limited controversy, election tribunal is requested to expedite the disposal of the election petition and preferably decide the same by 15th February, 2016. This petition is disposed of accordingly.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) ashish Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Fri Dec 18 02:35:16 IST 2015