CR No.1454 of 2011 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.1454 of 2011 (O&M). Decided on: May 17, 2011. Kitabo Devi. .. Petitioner VERSUS Rasid etc. .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporter? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? * * * PRESENT Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.K.S.Manuja, Advocate, for the respondents. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Respondents Rasid etc. have challenged the election of petitioner as Sarpanch of village Adhmi, held on 16.07.2010, on the ground that the Presiding Officer without showing the counting on Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) directed the respondents as well as other candidates to note the votes polled in favour of each candidate, but when he was requested to show them the actual counting on the machine, the Presiding Officer refused to do so by stating that as per election rules, it is not necessary to show . . . 1 CR No.1454 of 2011 (O&M) the counting/EVMs to anyone. Vide order dated 22.02.2011, the Election Tribunal, has ordered the re-counting of the votes forming an opinion that secrecy of the of the ballots is not going to be violated by order of recounting and that true picture would emerge only after the Electronic Voting Machines are brought in the Court and re-counting is done. Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that there is no procedure prescribed for ordering re- counting by Tribunal and that the order is without jurisdiction. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner as well as the counsel for the respondents. In the present case, the election has taken place not by way of ballot papers but through Electronic Voting Machines. Taking into consideration, the grounds on the basis of which election has been challenged i.e., without showing the result on Electronic Voting Machines, the results having been declared, the order of Election Tribunal is not unjust or improper, rather the interests of justice, would be adequately met in case the number of votes polled in favour of each candidate are made known by re-counting from the Electronic Voting Machines. No ground is made out for interference as the order is meant to achieve the ends of justice. Dismissed. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE May 17, 2011. rka . . . 2