Yogendra Singh vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Barin Ghosh, C.J.—An election was held for electing the Members, who would represent the Managing Committee of the College in question. After election was completed, a report was filed. In that, it has been stated that a person had snatched away 35 ballots, which were thereafter sealed, for the purpose of lodging a first information report. For that reason, the writ petition was filed, contending that the election has not been conducted in the manner the same should have been conducted. In the body of the writ petition nowhere there is an assertion that the result of the election has been declared without counting those 35 ballots. The report suggests that 35 ballots were snatched, and in respect thereof a decision was taken to file a first information report, and for that purpose those 35 ballots were kept in a sealed cover. The report does not suggest that those 35 ballots were not counted before the result of the election was declared. In the body of the writ petition there is no assertion that those 35 ballots were not counted, and if those were counted, the result would have different than that was declared. In the circumstances, though the writ petition has been dismissed on the ground that the petitioner alone could not challenge the election, we are of the view that the petitioner has not been able to make out any case of interference by this court, in its writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal fails, and the same is dismissed.