JUDGMENT : S.C. Parija, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. The Sarapanch of Netua Gram Panchayat under Jaleswar Block of Balasore district has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 06.07.2013, passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Jaleswar, in Election Misc. Case No. 4 of 2012, allowing the petition filed by opposite party no. 1 for recounting of total votes polled in Netua Gram Panchayat. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he had been declared elected as Sarpanch of Netua Gram Panchayat in the election held on 15.02.2013, by a margin of 12 votes, after recounting by the authorities-opposite party nos. 2 and 3, on the request of the opposite party no. 1. Being aggrieved by the result of the election, the opposite party no. 1 filed election petition before the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Jaleswar, which was registered as Election Misc. Case No. 4 of 2012. In the said election case, the opposite party no. 1 filed a petition for recounting of total votes polled in Netua Gram Panchayat. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the learned Civil Judge has allowed the application of opposite party no. 1 for recounting of votes mechanically and without application of mind. It is submitted that the inspection of ballot papers could not have been permitted as a matter of course, as it affects the secrecy of the ballots, especially when the election petition did not disclose adequate material facts for recounting. It is further submitted that as the authorities have already recounted the votes on the request of opposite party no. 1, there is no justification for the learned Civil Judge to direct for recounting of votes again. Accordingly, it is submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1 on the other hand submits that in the election for the post of Sarpanch of Netua Gram Panchayat, which was held on 15.02.2013, the present petitioner was declared elected as Sarpanch by a margin of 17 votes. As the margin of defeat was less than 1% of total votes polled, opposite party no. 1 filed application for recounting of the total votes polled. Instead of recounting the total votes polled in all the wards of Netua Gram Panchayat, the Election Officer-opposite party no. As the margin of defeat was less than 1% of total votes polled, opposite party no. 1 filed application for recounting of the total votes polled. Instead of recounting the total votes polled in all the wards of Netua Gram Panchayat, the Election Officer-opposite party no. 2 decided to recount the votes polled only in the ward nos. 3 and 5 and the rejected votes. After recounting the polled votes of the said two wards and the rejected votes, the margin of vote was reduced from 17 to 12 votes in favour of the petitioner and accordingly he was declared elected as the Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat. 5. Being aggrieved by the result of the election and the inaction of the Election Officer-opposite party no. 2 in not recounting the total votes polled in all the wards of Netua Gram Panchayat, the petitioner filed Election Misc. Case No. 4 of 2012 before the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Jaleswar. In the said election case the petitioner filed an application for recounting of votes polled in all the wards of Netua Gram Panchayat. 6. It is the case of the opposite party no. 1 that the learned Civil Judge has taken into consideration the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, in coming to the prima facie view that ballot papers were not counted as per the rules and individual voters have been allowed to cast their votes more than one occasion and as the margin of defeat between the opposite party no. 1 and the present petitioner is less than 1% of the total votes polled and recounting of votes of all the wards of Netua Gram Panchayat has not been done, the application for recounting of total votes polled in Netua Gram Panchayat should be allowed. Accordingly, it is submitted that the impugned order is legal and justified. 7. On a perusal of the impugned order it is seen that the learned Civil Judge has taken into consideration the fact that after recounting of votes polled in ward nos. 3 and 5 and the rejected votes, there has been a increase in the number of votes polled by the opposite party no. 1 and reduction in the votes polled by the present petitioner and the margin of defeat has been reduced from 17 to 12. 3 and 5 and the rejected votes, there has been a increase in the number of votes polled by the opposite party no. 1 and reduction in the votes polled by the present petitioner and the margin of defeat has been reduced from 17 to 12. Further, the learned Civil Judge on the basis of the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, including the deposition of the Election Officer (PW-6), has come to hold that prima facie there are materials available on record to show that individual voters have been allowed to cast their votes more than once in violation of the rules. Further, as the margin of votes between the petitioner and opposite party no. 1 is less than 1% of the total votes polled and there exist grounds to believe that there has been mistake in counting, recounting of votes of all the wards of Netua Gram Panchayat is necessary. Accordingly, learned Civil Judge has allowed the application of the opposite party no. 1 for recounting. 8. It is now well settled in law that recounting of votes in an election can only be directed if the Court on the basis of materials available on record is convinced that a large number of void votes had been received and such votes could have affected the outcome of the election, it is under a duty to examine the votes which have been cast, exclude the void votes and then recount the valid votes in order to come to the conclusion whether the reception of void votes had materially affected the result of the returned candidate. 9. In the present case, the evidence of the Election Officer (PW-6) and the official documents exhibited by him clearly goes to show that void votes had been received. Moreover, as the recounting of votes polled in only two wards of the Gram Panchayat and the rejected votes has resulted in a reduction in the margin of defeat of opposite party no. 1 from 17 to 12, which is less than 1% of the total votes polled, learned Civil Judge was fully justified in coming to hold that there has been mistake in counting of the votes and has accordingly directed recounting of total votes polled in all the wards, of Netua Gram Panchayat. 10. 1 from 17 to 12, which is less than 1% of the total votes polled, learned Civil Judge was fully justified in coming to hold that there has been mistake in counting of the votes and has accordingly directed recounting of total votes polled in all the wards, of Netua Gram Panchayat. 10. In view of the above, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order of the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Jaleswar, dated 06.07.2013, passed in Election Misc. Case No. 4 of 2012, so as to warrant any interference. 11. Writ petition being devoid of merits, the same is accordingly dismissed. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules. Final Result : Dismissed