Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Sub Divisional Officer has relied upon the written statement filed by Shri Dhaniram Sidar,
Lecturer and allowed election petition in part and directed for re-counting of the votes. He further submits that his application for examination of Shri
Baikunth Bihari and Shri Dhaniram Sidar has been rejected in view of order dated 07-12-2017 which is bad in law.
2. Learned counsel for Caveator/respondent No.1 and State Counsel would support the impugned order dated 07-12-2017.
3. With consent of both the parties, the matter is heard finally.
4. The petitioner has made an application for examination of Shri Baikunth Bihari and Shri Dhaniram Sidar as they were Presiding Officers of the
election but his application was rejected on 07-12- 2017. No sufficient and valid reasons have been assigned by the learned Sub Divisional Officer
(S.D.O.) for rejecting the said application and on the contrary their statement has been relied upon to grant the relief of re-counting against the
petitioner. This application ought to have been granted by the S.D.O. as they have admitted the case of election petitioner against the returned
candidate/petitioner, as the petitioner is entitled to cross-examine Shri Baikunth Bihari and Shri Dhaniram Sidar. In view of the above, the impugned
orders dated 06-02-2018 and 07-12-2017 are hereby set aside and the S.D.O. Kharsiya is directed to examine Shri Baikunth Bihari and Shri Dhaniram
Sidar within a period of 30 days from today and permit the petitioner to examine/cross-examine and to pass a fresh and reasoned order within two
months from the date of their examination.
5. In view of the above observation, the writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.
