Judgment Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. 1. This is a petition for quashing order dated 20.8.2003 (Annexure P-l) passed by Additional Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Tohana (Respondent No. 2) under Section 176 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 ; set aside the election of the petitioner to the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Mussa Khera, Tehsil Tohana, District Fatehabad and declare Respondent No. 2 elected to the said office. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The main ground on which respondent No. 2 had challenged the election of the petitioner was that the votes polled in the election held on 12.3.2000 were not properly counted and that even though, she had secured the highest number of valid votes,the Returning Officer had illegally declared the petitioner elected to the Office of Sarpanch. 4. On consideration of the pleadings and evidence produced by the parties, respon- dent No.l passed order dated 19.7.2003 for recount of the votes.In compliance of that order, the ballots were summoned in the Court and were scrutinised in the presence of the counsel for the parties. Thereafter, respondent No.l recorded the following findings:- "5. First of all 19 rejected votes were checked. On two votes seal was found affixed in the column of Bhaga Bai. Shri S.C.Bajaj, Advocate has stated that the seal is not in the column of Bhaga Bai. Votes were checked with magnified lense. The seal affixed were found in the column of Bhaga Bai. Shri S.C.Bajaj, Advocate has stated that three votes are in favour of the Kailash Bai out of the 19 votes. These three votes were also checked. It is found that in one vote the seal is in the name of Kailash Bai but the entire ink is also in the column of Malkiat Kaur. In the second vote, there is thumb impression in the column of Kailash Rani. In the third vote the thumb impression is affixed in the column of Kailash Rani and the ink of the same is also present in the column of Bhaga Bai. In this way, these three votes were rightly rejected by the election staff. 6. The second bundle of this booth is pertaining to the votes of Krishna Devi. 38 votes were found casted in favour of Krishna Devi. 28 votes were found valid. 10 votes were found rejected. In this way, these three votes were rightly rejected by the election staff. 6. The second bundle of this booth is pertaining to the votes of Krishna Devi. 38 votes were found casted in favour of Krishna Devi. 28 votes were found valid. 10 votes were found rejected. No dispute was raised by any of the party on this point. 7. Third bundle is pertaining to the votes of Malkiat Kaur. These votes were also counted. 47 votes were found valid and 17 votes were found rejected/invalid. No dispute was raised by any of the party over this point, 8. Fourth bundle is pertaining to the votes of Kailash Rani. 133 votes were recovered from this bundle. One vote was found casted in favour of Bhaga Bai. In this regard no dispute was raised by any of the party. 42 votes were found disputed. These votes were also checked by both the counsels. Shri S.C.Bajaj Advocate has stated that these votes are valid. These votes were checked with the magnified lens. On checking it is found that the ink of the seal was also present in the column of other candidate. Therefore, these votes are declared invalid. 9. Fifth bundle is pertaining to the votes of Bhaga Bai petitioner. 164 votes were recovered from this bundle. 20 votes were found disputed. Shri N.L.Garg Advocate has stated that these votes are not liable to be rejected. Two other votes were also disputed by Shri S.C.Bajaj Advocate. On Checking it was found that the seal is affixed in the column of Bhaga Bai. Little ink of the thumb impression or pad appeared to be spread at the time of casting of the votes. 10. The record of booth No. 87 was opened. Bundle of two cancelled votes were checked. No dispute was raised. 11. Next bundle of Krishna Devi was checked. It was containing 10 votes. All the 10 votes were found valid. No objection was raised. 12. Bundle of Malkiat Kaur is containing 88 votes. Two votes were found invalid. 86 votes were fond valid. No objection was raised. 13. Bundle of Kailash Bai opened. It is containing 185 votes. 183 votes were found valid. Two votes were found invalid. On one invalid vote only ink is present. On the another invalid vote in the column of Krishna Devi complete thumb impression is found affixed. Two votes were found invalid. 86 votes were fond valid. No objection was raised. 13. Bundle of Kailash Bai opened. It is containing 185 votes. 183 votes were found valid. Two votes were found invalid. On one invalid vote only ink is present. On the another invalid vote in the column of Krishna Devi complete thumb impression is found affixed. In the column of KailashBai seal is found affixed. In this way these two votes were validly found rejected. 14. Bundle of Bhaga Bai is containing 143 votes. 139 votes were found valid. Four votes were found invalid. No dispute was raised by any of the party." 5. On the basis of the above findings, respondent No.l held that respondent No. 2 had secured 277 valid votes as against 273 valid votes secured by the petitioner. Ac- cordingly, he set aside the election of the petitioner and declared respondent No. 2 elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. 6. Shri S.K. Garg, learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the impugned order mainly on the ground that the conclusion recorded by respondent No.l in respect of 42 votes is perverse. He further argued that two other votes which were earlier counted in favour of the petitioner were wrongly rejected and in this manner respondent No. 2 was wrongly declared elected to the Officer of Sarpanch. 7. Mrs. Rupinder Kaur Thind supported the findings and conclusion recorded by respondent No.l and argued that the High Court cannot interfere with the findings of fact which are based on proper appreciation of evidence. 8. We agree with the abstract proposition advanced by learned counsel for respondent No. 2 that the High Court will not interfere with the finding of fact recorded by a Subordinate Court or quasi judicial authority after proper appreciation of evidence produced by the parties but in the facts of the present case, we are convinced that the .findings recorded by respondent No. l qua 42 votes which were treated invalid is perverse. The only ground on which respondent No. l treated all the 42 votes to be invalid was that ink of the seal was found present in the column of other candidates as well. The only ground on which respondent No. l treated all the 42 votes to be invalid was that ink of the seal was found present in the column of other candidates as well. However, there is nothing in the impugned order to show that the learned Presiding Officer had examined the ballots with reference to the provisions contained in Rule 65 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Election Rules, 1994 (for short, the Rules) and then determined that the particular number of votes were invalid. Mere spilling of ink in the column of the other candidate cannot itself be sufficient to declare the vote as invalid. It was the duty of the officer concerned to consider each vote separately and then decide whether the same was to be treated invalid. 9. In our opinion, failure of respondent No.l to carry out the scrutiny of the votes keeping in view the relevant provisions of the rules has the effect of vitiating the findings recorded by him. 10. In view of the above conclusion, we do not consider it necessary to deal with other points raised by the petitioner and feel that ends of the justice would be met by remanding the case of respondent No.l for fresh adjudication of the election petition filed by respondent No. 2. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded to respondent no.l for fresh adjudication of the election petition. The parties are directed to appear before respondent No.l on 2.3.2004. The officer concerned shall undertake fresh recount/scrutiny of votes and the decide the matter on or before 15.3.2004. Copy of the order be given dasti on payment of fee prescribed for urgent application.