IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13958 of 2007 RUBY KUMARI Versus THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION& For the petitioner: Mr. S.B.K. Manglam,Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjiv Nikesh --- 2. 10.12.2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 13.9.2007 passed by the Munsif, Nawadah in Misc. ( Election) Case No.10 of 2006, by which he has allegedly directed for correction of the original Form-20 of Booth No. 181 of Gram Panchayat Raj, Erurri, as per photo copy, which was marked as Exhibit, filed on behalf of the State of Bihar in the case and further directed that it should be treated as amended. The finding of the Court below was that in favour of the petitioner in the said Form the 03 vote has been changed to 23 by interpolation and that of another contestant Ranju Devi was changed from 26 to 06 and in the attested copy of the same ink had been spread. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to argue against the findings recorded by the court below. However, this Court on a consideration of the documents in question, which have been annexed as various annexures, does not see any reason to interfere with the findings of the learned Munsif at this stage. The other contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the direction of the Court below is for correction of the original Form No. 20 of Booth No. 181 of the said Gram Panchayat does not appear to be correct. From a bare reading of the said order, it appears 2 that the learned court below has arrived at the conclusion the photo copy of Form- 20 produced by the State government would be treated as correct and has merely directed that the original Form No. to 20 would be treated as amended to that extent. There is no direction for making any correction or further interpolation in the said original document and according to this Court, no such order could have been passed by the court below. The order only records a finding to that extent without making any physical correction in the said documents. The finding recorded is merely as to the legal effect of the said documents, according to the Tribunal. The writ application does not have any merit and it is, accordingly, dismissed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.)