Main points of the High Court’s decision
– The petition of BJP corporators deserves to be heard.
– The Mayor/Returning Officer rejecting the vote and declaring it invalid was wrong in law, that too after the phase of scrutiny of votes and quota determination was successfully completed.
– The Mayor/RO could not have taken a decision to hold re-election, as doing so was not in accordance with any of the substantial material involved in the issue. The mayor took such a decision without any authority.
Taking the decision to hold the re-election of the mayor was outside the purview of his powers vested in the law. In the present case, this was done without any authority.
With this verdict being pronounced, Justice Kaurav said that the order issued on February 24, 2023 stands cancelled. Instructed the Mayor/RO to declare the result of Form No-4 considering the disputed vote given in favor of Pankaj Luthra as valid.
On what basis did the HC reach this conclusion
The High Court observed that the DMC Act-1957, Regulation-1958 and Rules-1956 applicable in the present case do not empower the Mayor to take such a decision at the present stage of the election process. The Court said that if the rejection of ballot papers is allowed at the counting stage, it would vitiate the entire process of election which would not be in accordance with the law. Once the scrutiny phase has been completed to separate valid and invalid ballot papers, the re-scrutiny of those ballot papers cannot be considered valid under the law.
Source: navbharattimes.indiatimes.com”