THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2716 OF 2007 DATED:04.03.2011 Between: Guntreddi Uday Kumar. .... PETITIONER And Reddi Appala Naidu & 3 others. .... RESPONDENTS ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 12.06.2007, in I.A.No.740 of 2006 in E.O.P.No.4 of 2006 on the file of the learned Election Tribunal (Principal Junior Civil Judge), Parvathipuram, wherein the petition filed by the 1st respondent herein under Section 151 r/w Order XVI Rule 6 CPC, seeking a direction to the District Election Authority and the Deputy District Election Authority-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Parvathipuram to produce the ballet boxes, pertaining to the election of Sarpanch of Potturu Gram Panchayat of Parvathipuram mandal, was allowed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record 3. According to the 1st respondent, out of the total 975 votes polled the validity of 52 votes was not decided by the Election Officer in spite of the request made by him and 25 votes, which were polled in favour of the 1st respondent, were declared as invalid despite the objection raised by the 1st respondent and 25 valid votes polled by the 1st respondent were counted in the votes polled in favour of the petitioner herein. The 1st respondent herein filed I.A.No.740 of 2006 for summoning the ballet boxes before the Court. The official respondents did not file any counter. Petitioner herein opposed the petition. After hearing both sides, the Election Tribunal directed the official respondents to produce the ballet papers in a sealed box through authorized representative. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the absence of any finding that recounting is required, summoning of the ballet boxes is not called for. 5. It is to be seen that the question as to whether or not recounting is required, would have to be considered by the Tribunal at an appropriate stage, after framing issues or points. The ballet boxes are required to be produced before the Tribunal so as to ensure their safe custody so that in the event of there being any finding as to recounting of the votes, the same can be facilitated by mere summoning of the ballet boxes. No inference can be drawn that recounting of the votes is felt necessary. The scope of the present application is limited to the extent of securing the safe custody of the ballet boxes as otherwise there is possibility of being disposed of as per rules by the concerned authority. 6. In the circumstances, it is held that the impugned order directing production of ballet boxes before the Tribunal does not call for interference by this Court. 7. Accordingly, Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. Interim stay granted on 27.06.2007 stands vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 04th March, 2011. Tsy