JUDGMENT Mr. Ram Chand Gupta, J.: - The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 10.9.2010 passed by respondent no. 1 and for staying the operation and implementation of impugned order dated 10.9.2010 during the pendency of the present revision petition. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Election Tribunal, Dhuri. 3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition has not been filed as per Section 76 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (hereafter referred to be ‘the Act’) as the same has not been filed by the candidate in person and that hence, the same is not maintainable. However, the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned order has illegally observed that petition is maintainable as counsel was authorised to file the election petition on behalf of respondent, as power of attorney has been executed in his favour by the candidate and vide the same, all the rights were given to him and hence, presenting of election petition by his counsel is valid. Hence, it is contended that the petition has not been properly filed and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed as per Section 80 of the and hence, the impugned order passed by learned Tribunal for recounting of votes cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for respondent no.2 that the said point has to be decided at the time of final hearing of the petition. It is further contended that moreover, respondent-petitioner was present at the time of presenting of petition and that however, the Tribunal did not mark his presence. It is also contended that respondent-petitioner also got attested his affidavit on the date of filling of petition and hence, he was present in the office of Election Tribunal on that day. 5. Before adverting to the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, it would be necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of Sections 74, 76 and 80 of the Act, which read as under: 74. Election petition: - No election shall be called in question except by an election petition presented in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 76. Election petition: - No election shall be called in question except by an election petition presented in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 76. Presentation of petition: - (1) An election petition may be presented on one or more of the grounds specified in sub section (1) of section 89 to the Election Tribunal by any candidate to such election or by any elector within a period of forty five days from the date of election of the returned candidate or if there are more than one returned candidates at the election and there are different dates of their election, then the later of these dates shall be taken into account for this purpose. (2) Every election petition shall be accompanied by as many copies thereof, as there are respondents mentioned in the petition and every such copy shall be attested by the petitioner under his own signatures to be a true copy of the petition. 80. Trial of election petitions: - (1) the Election Tribunal shall dismiss an election petition which does not comply with the provisions of section 76 or section 77 or section 103. Explanation- An order of the Election Tribunal dismissing an election petition under this sub-section, shall be deemed to be an order made under clause (a) of section 87. (2). Where more than one election petitions are presented to the Election Tribunal in respect of the same matter, the Presiding Officer of the Election Tribunal may, in his discretion try them separately or in one or more groups. (3). Any candidate not already a respondent shall, upon application made by him to the Election Tribunal within fourteen days from the date of commencement of the trial of the election petition and subject to any order as to security for costs which may be made by the Election Tribunal, be entitled to be joined as a respondent. Explanation. -- For the purposes of this sub-section and of section 86, the trial of a petition shall be deemed to commence on the date fixed for the respondents to appear before the Election Tribunal and to answer the claim or claims, as the case may be made in the petition. Explanation. -- For the purposes of this sub-section and of section 86, the trial of a petition shall be deemed to commence on the date fixed for the respondents to appear before the Election Tribunal and to answer the claim or claims, as the case may be made in the petition. (4) The Election Tribunal may, upon such terms as to costs and otherwise, as it may deem fit, allow to particulars of any corrupt practice alleged in the petition to be amended or amplified in such manner, as may in its opinion be necessary for ensuring a fair and effective trial of the petition, but shall not allow any amendment of the petition which will have the effect of introducing particulars of a corrupt practice which has not been previously alleged in the petition. (5) The trial of an election petition shall, so far as is practicable consistently with the interest of justice in respect of the trial be continued from day to day until the conclusion, unless the Election Tribunal finds the adjournment of the trial beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded in writing. (6) Every election petition shall be tried as expeditiously as possible and every endeavor shall be made to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date on which the election petition is presented to the Election tribunal for trial.” Chapter XII deals with election petition. Chapter XII of the Act lays down a complete format which provides as to who would present the election petition; who would be the parties to the election petition, what would be the contents of the election petition, how the election petition would be tried; what would be the procedure, to what extent, election Tribunal can decide and what are the grounds to declare the election void. etc. etc. 6. Section 74 specifically says that no election shall be called in question except by way of an election petition presented in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. Section 76 mandates that an election petition may be presented on one or more of the grounds specified in subsection (1) of section 89 to the Election Tribunal by any candidate to such election or by any elector within a period of forty five days from the date of election of the returned candidate. Section 76 mandates that an election petition may be presented on one or more of the grounds specified in subsection (1) of section 89 to the Election Tribunal by any candidate to such election or by any elector within a period of forty five days from the date of election of the returned candidate. Section 80 provides that the Election Tribunal shall dismiss an election petition which does not comply with the provisions of section 76 or section 77 or section 103. 7. Hence, the election petition is to be presented as per Section 76 of the Act, which provides that election petition has to be presented by candidate in person and if there is any violation of Section 76 of the Act, Election Tribunal is having no other option but to dismiss the election petition under Section 80 of the Act. 8. Counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon a judgment delivered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Gurlal Singh vs. Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal, Block Lehra, District Sangrur and others, 2010 (5) Recent Civil Reports (Civil) 474 in which this point has been elaborately discussed and it was held that if an election petition is not filed by a candidate in person, the same is liable to be dismissed under Section 80 of the Act and hence, the appeal was allowed and the impugned order passed by the Election Tribunal was set aside. 9. Counsel for the respondent fails to show any other contrary authority on the point. 10. Hence, there is nothing as to why this Court should take a different view on the said point as taken by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Gurlal Singh’s case (Supra). The present case is fully covered by the said authority on the point. Even the Tribunal in the impugned order has mentioned that election petition was presented through counsel, as he was authorised by the respondent-petitioner to do all acts on his behalf and on this reasoning, this petition was held as has been filed validly. However, the said observation is not in accordance with the provisions of the act particularly Section 76 of the Act and hence, he should have dismissed the petition under Section 80 of the Act. As the very petition is not maintainable, impugned order passed by learned Election Tribunal cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. 11. However, the said observation is not in accordance with the provisions of the act particularly Section 76 of the Act and hence, he should have dismissed the petition under Section 80 of the Act. As the very petition is not maintainable, impugned order passed by learned Election Tribunal cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. 11. So far as argument of learned counsel for the respondent that he was present in person and however, his presence was not marked by learned Presiding Officer of the Tribunal is concerned, the same cannot be accepted as no such objection was earlier taken by him in the proceedings. This is an after thought plea and hence, the same cannot be accepted. The plea is against the record. 12. Hence, the present petition is accepted and the impugned order dated 10.9.2010 passed by the learned Election Tribunal is set aside. ------------0.S.L.0------------