FAO No. 6039 of 2010 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No. 6039 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 10.11.2010 Satpal Kaur ... Appellant vs Jarnail Kaur and others .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Y. P. Singh, Advocate for Mr. S. S. Rangi, Advocate, for the appellant. Rajesh Bindal J. Appellant Satpal Kaur, who had filed the Election Petition before the learned Election Tribunal, Fatehgarh Sahib (hereinafter to be referred as “the Tribunal”), is in appeal before this court challenging the election of Jarnail Kaur, respondent no. 1 as Panch from Scheduled Caste Category for Gram Panchayat, Lohari Kalan, Tehsil Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib, held on 26.5.2008. The appellant was one of the candidates who had filed his nomination for the office of Panch against the seat reserved for Scheduled Caste Category. She having not been elected, filed the Election Petition before the Tribunal claiming that respondents no. 1, and 4 to 7 in connivance with the polling staff, had got respondent no. 1 elected to the post of Panch from Scheduled Caste Category. The learned Tribunal having rejected the Election Petition, the order is impugned in the present appeal. Along with the appeal, an application seeking condonation of 436 days' delay in refiling the appeal has also been filed. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was not allowed to sit along with his polling agent because she was pregnant. The counting of votes was done in an illegal manner. She was shown to have secured 118 votes and the elected candidate Jarnail Kaur secured 168 votes. The appellant in evidence tendered affidavit of Gurmeet Singh son of Rounk Singh as PW1/A and her own affidavit as PW2/A. It was prayed that as the counting was done in illegal manner, the same deserves to be set aside and re-counting be ordered. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The undisputed facts on record, as have been noticed by the Tribunal in the impugned order, are that she neither filed any complaint against the polling staff nor against the elected panchayat members before any authority, nor she FAO No. 6039 of 2010 -2- produced any clinching evidence in the proceeding before the Tribunal. As is evident from the impugned order except her own affidavit, only evidence produced was in the form of affidavit of PW1 Gurmeet Singh son of Rounak Singh, who was also one of the unsuccessful candidate, which cannot be considered as an independent evidence. No other candidate filed any complaint against the polling staff or raised any objection at any stage. All the aforesaid facts show that the appellant was well aware of the fact that she has secured 118 votes and Jarnail Kaur respondent no. 1 was rightly declared elected having secured 168 votes. Accordingly, no interference is called for with the impugned order. The appeal is dismissed. The application for condonation of delay in refiling the appeal is also dismissed. 10.11.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge