In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 7151 of 2008 (O&M) Makhan Singh ..... Petitioner vs Channa and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Harinder Kumar,Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rishi Kaushal, Advocate, for respondent no. 1. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 28.11.2008 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal-cum-Additional Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur (for short, “the Tribunal”) in an Election Petition filed by respondent no. 1 against the petitioner on the plea that without recording any evidence the Tribunal has arbitrarily ordered for recounting of votes. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent no. 1 was required to prima-facie make out a case for recounting of votes and it could only be thereafter that the Tribunal could order for recounting of votes. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 submitted that on 28.11.2008 vide separate order, the Tribunal had framed issues arising out in the election petition filed by respondent no. 1 and on that date only the record of the election was summoned. In the order impugned, the word 'recounting' has been mentioned only for the reason that one of the grounds in the petition for setting aside of election filed by respondent no. 1 is that the returning officer had committed illegality/irregularity in the counting of votes. He submitted that there is no direction regarding recounting of votes as only issues have been framed and respondent no. 1 is yet to led evidence and recounting of votes would be ordered thereafter in case a prima facie case is made out for the same. Considering the aforesaid stand of respondent no.1, the apprehension which is shown by the petitioner does not survive as the Tribunal is yet to form a final opinion as to whether the recounting is to be ordered or not after the parties lead their evidence in that regard. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of as infructuous. 20.3.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge