ORDER 1. The learned counsel for the respondents has made appearance on caveat. A formal notice is waived. 2. Looking to the short controversy arising for decision, we have with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties heard the matter finally and the same is disposed of in terms of the following order. 3. Vide notification dated 17-12-2004 issued by the Election Commission of India, the programme for Legislative Assembly elections in the States of Bihar, Jharkhand and Haryana in the year 2005 was announced. We are concerned with the State of Haryana only in this petition. The date of poll was appointed as 3-2-2005 and the date of counting was appointed as 27-22005. There are about 77,000 postal ballot papers issued in the State of Haryana. The last date appointed for receipt of postal ballots is 8.00 a.m. on 27 - 2- 2005. After the polling had taken place, vide letter dated 17-2-2005 addressed to the Chief Electoral Officer, Haryana, Chandigarh, the Election Commission of India directed the date of counting of votes in all the Assembly constituencies of the Haryana Legislative Assembly to be preponed as 23-2-2005. The Election Commission of India was conscious that on the preponed date of counting the postal ballots would not be received. On 18-2-2005, the Election Commission issued another letter to the Chief Electoral Officer, Haryana, Chandigarh whereby it directed inter alia that: "The results of counting of votes of such of the Assembly constituencies where the margin of votes between the winning candidate and his nearest rival is less than the total number of postal ballot papers issued but not received till 4.00 p.m. on 23-2-2005, shall not be declared by the Returning Officers concerned without the prior permission of the Commission. In such cases, the Returning Officers shall refer the matter to the Commission along with the information relating to the total number of postal ballot papers dispatched and the total number of postal ballot papers received back from the voters by the time of counting, to enable the Commission to process the matter. This shall be conveyed to all the Returning Officers immediately for strict compliance. It may be clarified that the postal ballot papers received back from the electors by 4.00 p.m. on 23-2-2005 should be counted by the Returning Officer for computing the result." 4. This shall be conveyed to all the Returning Officers immediately for strict compliance. It may be clarified that the postal ballot papers received back from the electors by 4.00 p.m. on 23-2-2005 should be counted by the Returning Officer for computing the result." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Rule 54-A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 which provides that on the date of counting the Returning Officer shall first deal with the postal ballot papers in the manner provided by the Rules. It is submitted that ordinarily the counting of votes should commence after the expiry of date and time appointed for the receipt of the postal ballot papers whereafter the postal ballot papers have to be dealt with first and then the counting shall follow. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that there is no special reason or pressing necessity felt by the Election Commission of India for preponing the date of counting; it has been done only as a matter of convenience inasmuch as the ballot boxes are lying in safe custody in several public buildings specially those belonging to schools and paramilitary forces have been deployed for the purpose of security. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the Election Commission thought that by preponing the date of counting the staff employed for security reasons could be utili sed elsewhere and the public buildings in occupation could also be vacated. The stand taken by the learned counsel for the respondents, under instructions, is that the Election Commission of India is not very serious on insisting on the counting taking place on the preponed date and is not opposed to the idea of the counting taking place on 27-2-2005, the date previously notified. 5. In view of the stand taken by the respondents and keeping in view the language of Rule 54-A abovesaid, the petition is allowed and it is directed f that the counting of votes shall take place on 27-2-2005, as previously notified, and not on 23-2-2005, the date appointed vide letters dated 17-2-2005 and 18-2-2005 of the Election Commission, as abovestated, which have the effect of preponing the date of counting. 6. 6. However, before parting, we would like to make it clear that this decision shall not be construed as an adjudication on the power of the Election Commission of India to prepone the date of counting if such a decision is required to be taken for reasons persuading the Election Commission to do so. We leave that question to be examined in an appropriate case in the event of an occasion arising for the purpose. So also, this order is not to be treated as a precedent in the matter of interpretation of Article 329-B of the Constitution. 7.The petition is allowed in the above terms. 8. No order as to the costs. WP (C) No. 98012005 9. This petition be treated as disposed of in terms of the order passed today in WP (C) No. 95 of 2005. Court Masters