ORDER N.C. Khichi, J. - This writ petition is directed against the orders dated 2.8.1993, passed by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawanshahr, and dated 20.9.1994, passed by Addl. District Judge, Jalandhar. 2. The facts as given in the writ petition are that election to the post of Sarpanch in village/Gram Panchayat Malupota, Tehsil Nawanshahr, was held on 20.1.1993 in which the petitioner and one Makhan Singh (respondent No. 2) contested, Petitioner secured 462 votes and whereas respondent No. 2 (Makhan Singh) secured only 437 votes. Resultantly, respondent No. 2 filed an election petition before the competent authority on various ground including that some votes of the persons mentioned underage, some votes of the persons mentioned belonged to other villages, but have been cast/polled in the election of Gram Panchayat Malupota. It was further alleged by respondent No. 2 in his election petition that some voters appeared at two places, thereby praying that there has been illegal casting of votes which has materially affected the result. 3. The competent authority after looking into the facts and circumstances of the case and after recording the statement of Malkiat Chand on 2.8.1993, accepted the election petition vide its orders of even date. 4. Before the petitioner could file appeal, respondent No. 2 became Sarpanch and got the charge from the Administrator in the month of August, 1993. The Appellate Authority granted the stay of the operation of the order under appeal on 30.8.1993. Prior to the passing of this order, respondent No. 2 had already taken charge as Sarpanch in August, 1993, therefore, he filed an application before the Appellate Authority for vacation of the stay order which was ordered on 15.9.1993. A copy of this order has been annexed as Annexure P.2 with the writ petition. Against this order, the petitioner filed C.W.P. No. 11807 of 1993 which was disposed of on 18.2.1994 by a Division Bench of this Court by giving a direction that the appeal be decided according to law within three months from the date next fixed in the appeal and in the meantime, stay was ordered to continue. 5. The learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar vide order dated 20.9.1994, dismissed the appeal with costs by passing a detailed judgment taking into consideration the grounds raised by the appellant. 5. The learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar vide order dated 20.9.1994, dismissed the appeal with costs by passing a detailed judgment taking into consideration the grounds raised by the appellant. Before the learned Additional District Judge it was not disputed that Malkiat Chand- appellant (now petitioner) had made an unequivocal admission that votes have been polled wrongly in his favour and offered that petition be accepted and Makhan Singh (respondent No. 2) be declared as elected Sarpanch of village Panchayat, Malupota. 6. It has been argued by the learned counsel that no compromise was effected between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 and relations between them were strained and in any case, the alleged admission of the petitioner is due to misunderstanding and lack of understanding the law and technicality of procedure. He further argued that even if the statement of the petitioner is taken on its face value, even then on the basis of casting of illegal votes, the election of Sarpanch could not be set aside. 7. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 argued that consent for setting aside the election was given by the petitioner himself as he admitted before the competent authority that 50 bogus votes were polled in his favour which was in violation of the law. He further argued that the orders passed by the courts below are not in any manner against the law. It was his contention that even if before the Appellate Authority it has been admitted by the petitioner that the statement was made by him and therefore, he cannot wriggle out of his voluntary statement. 8. I have also perused the statement made by the petitioner in which he accepts that he received at least 50 bogus votes. No where he has mentioned that under what circumstances, he made this statement. No circumstance has been given in the writ petition as to whether any pressure was put upon him or that his statement was not made freely and voluntarily. No where he has mentioned that under what circumstances, he made this statement. No circumstance has been given in the writ petition as to whether any pressure was put upon him or that his statement was not made freely and voluntarily. The orders passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawanshahr and that of the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, in appeal therefore, cannot be said to be bad in any manner, the learned Additional District Judge has further dealt with the contention raised before him that the relief of declaring Makhan Singh as elected Sarpanch could not be granted being not in conformity with Sections 13-O and 13-OO of the Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 by holding that such a relief was prayed for and it is not that the authorities under the Act could not have granted this relief. 9. In this view of the matter, I find that both the Courts below have not acted beyond jurisdiction vested in them and the orders are in conformity with law. No interference in the impugned orders passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawanshahr and that of the learned Addl. District Judge, Jalandhar, is called for by this Court in the exercise of writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is dismissed being without merit. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.