Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
S. Anand vs A.P. State Election Commissioner, on 31 March, 2021
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
WRIT PETITION No.7374 OF 2021
ORDER:-
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. This writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent-Returning Officer in declaring the 5th respondent as elected Sarpanch of Ramagiri Grama Panchayat, Pichatur Mandal, Chittoor District, without recounting the votes of all the contesting candidates and without reconsidering the invalid votes, as illegal and contrary to law and consequently sought direction to the 4th respondent to recount all the votes polled to all the candidates.
3. The petitioner has contested for the election of Sarpanch held for Ramagiri Grama Panchayat on 21-02-2021. The 5th respondent also contested the election along with him. After counting the votes that were polled in the said election, the 4th respondent-Returning Officer declared the 5th respondent as the elected Sarpanch of Ramagiri Grama Panchayat. The petitioner states that there are 1351 voters in the said Grama Panchayat, out of the same, 1126 votes were polled and out of 1126 votes that were polled, 38 votes were declared as invalid and 5 votes are declared as NOTA. He contends that he and the 5th respondent secured almost equal number of votes. So, the 4th respondent-Returning Officer has taken up recounting of votes and in the said recounting of votes, the votes that were polled to other candidates are not recounted and only the votes polled to 2 the petitioner and 5th respondent are alone counted. Therefore, pointing out the irregularities and illegalities in the process of recounting of votes, the writ petitioner sought the aforesaid declaration and direction as detailed supra.
4. Admittedly, the entire election process has been completed and even after recounting of votes, the 4th respondent-Returning Officer has declared the 5th respondent as elected Sarpanch of Ramagiri Grama Panchayat. It is now well settled law that when the petitioner as a contesting candidate is aggrieved by the recounting of votes that has taken place as per the irregularities and illegalities pointed out by him in this writ petition, the appropriate remedy available to him under law is only by way of filing election petition before the competent Election Tribunal as contemplated under the Act. The petitioner cannot invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of the said grievance. Therefore, this writ petition is clearly not maintainable under law.
5. So, this Writ Petition is dismissed as not maintainable at the admission stage. There shall be no order as to costs.
However, the petitioner is at liberty to question the said election of the 5th respondent as Sarpanch of Ramagiri Grama Panchayat on the grounds which are now urged in this writ petition and other grounds to which he is legally entitled before the competent Election Tribunal within the prescribed period of limitation.
3
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
____________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date : 31-03-2021 Note: Issue CC tomorrow (B/o) ARR 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY WRIT PETITION No.7374 OF 2021 Date : 31-03-2021 ARR