THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.446 of 2010 ORDER: Election to the Chemullapalle Grampanchayat of Kadapa District was held on 21-07-2006. The petitioner and the 5th respondent filed their nominations for the office of Sarpanch. The 4th respondent functioned as the Election Officer, at Stage-II. The petitioner was declared as elected. The 5th respondent filed Election O.P.No.1 of 2008 before the Election Tribunal-cum-Junior Civil Judge, Mydukur, (for short ‘the Tribunal’) challenging the election of the petitioner. The principal allegation was that, serious irregularities have taken place in the counting of votes, and quite large number of ballots used in the election, were found at various places in the Village. Certain other allegations were also made. Through its order dated 18-12-2009, the Tribunal allowed the O.P., and has set aside the election of the petitioner. The prayer made by the 5th respondent, to declare him as elected, was rejected. An order was passed directing the Election Authority to conduct the election afresh. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard Sri J. Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, and learned counsel for the 5th respondent. The petitioner and the 5th respondent were the two candidates, who contested for the office of Sarpanch. The 4th respondent acted as the Election Officer, at Stage-II. After the polling was completed, the counting of votes was conducted at 2:00 P.M., on 21-07-2006. The petitioner was declared as Sarpanch with the majority of 384 votes, over the 5th respondent. Till three days after the election, everything was normal. On the third day, as many as 308 official ballot papers were found near the elementary school, in thorny bushes. The Village elders are said to have collected those ballots and found that all of them are polled in favour of the 5th respondent. Through an application, the 5th respondent and village elders approached the District Collector, the 1st respondent, along with the ballots so found. Enquiry was conducted, and nothing substantial emerged. The 5th respondent filed O.P.No.1 of 2008, by incorporating these allegations. He prayed that, a) the votes be recounted, b) the election of the petitioner be set aside, and c) that he be declared as elected. The matter was contested by the petitioner, as well as the 4th respondent and they filed counters. While the 4th respondent deposed as DW-1, the 5th respondent deposed as PW-1. In his cross- examination, the 4th respondent, as DW-1, admitted that he is answerable till the stage of submission of the election material to the concerned authorities. Though he denied the factum of bundles of votes having been found in the village, in his cross-examination, he admitted that he went to the office of M.P.D.O., Khajipet, after declaration of results, but on finding that the cover containing the ballot papers were not available, he came back to the Village and took them again. He did not mention these aspects in his counter. He completely feigned ignorance about the recovery of ballot papers, after the polling was done. The evidence of the petitioner herein, as DW-2, was hardly of any use. He was not able to state as to how ballot papers ere found, three days after the counting was done. The Tribunal discussed the matter at length, and found that the election process itself is vitiated, and accordantly directed that the election of the petitioner be set aside, and re-election be held. In the facts and circumstances, that is the only relief, which could have been granted. Any irregularity of such a large scale would naturally vitiate the election, and no exception can be taken to the impugned order, passed by the Tribunal. The 4th respondent has acted in an irresponsible manner in conducting the election. As many as 308 used ballot papers were found in the village, shortly after the election. The answer given by him is hardly convincing. An enquiry needs to be held against him, so that such instances do not recur in future. The 1st respondent shall conduct enquiry in this regard, and forward his report to the Commissioner of Intermediate Education, for necessary action. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. The election, as directed by the Tribunal, shall be held within two months from today. It is directed that the 1st respondent shall conduct a detailed enquiry into the irregularities committed by the 4th respondent, as Election Officer, in the election held for Chemullapalle Grampanchayat, of Kadapa District on 29-07-2006, and the report thereof shall be submitted to the Commissioner of Intermediate Education for necessary action. Till the proceedings assume finality, the 4th respondent shall not be entrusted with any election duties. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.11-02-2010. KO