JUDGMENT : M.R. Shah, J. 1. By way of this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and order quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 27-2-2015 of the Authorized Officer/Election Officer - respondent No. 3 declaring cancellation of the election of the agriculturists' constituency of A.P.M.A., Unjha. It also prayed further for an appropriate writ, direction and order directing the respondents to countermand the poll in relation to the General Election of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Unjha (hereinafter referred to as the "A.P.M.C, Unjha") and for commencing the said election anew in all respects as if for anew election in respect of all the constituencies i.e. Agriculturists' Constituency, Traders' Constituency and Co-operative Marketing Constituency. That the election of the A.P.M.C, Unjha came to be declared by Election programme dated 6-12-2014 with respect to all the constituencies i.e. Agriculturists' Constituency, Traders' Constituency and Co-operative Marketing Constituency. That as per the said election programme the voting in the said election is scheduled to take place on 4-3-2005, and thereafter, counting was to take place on 5-3-2015. 1.1. Pursuant to the aforesaid election programme, the Authorized Officer published notification on 16-12-2014 for election of 14 seats of all the three constituencies of the A.P.M.C, Unjha. That the said three constituencies consist of 8 seats of agriculturists' constituency, 4 seats of traders' constituency and 2 seats of co-operative marketing constituency. That after scrutiny of the final list of the candidates came to be published on 25-2-2015 and as observed voting/polling was to take place on 4-3-2015. That after publication of the final list of the candidates on 25-2-2015 and before the actual date of polling, one of the duly nominated candidates of Agriculturists' Constituency viz. Shri Somabhai Gopaldas Patel died on 26-2-2015. That in view of the death of one of the nominated candidates of Agriculturists' Constituency in exercise of powers under Rule 24 of the Gujarat Agriculture Produce Markets Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules"), respondent No. 3 - Authorized Officer - Election Officer has countermanded the polling in respect of Agriculturists' Constituency, which was scheduled on 4-3-2015 and public notice has been given in the local newspaper on 28-2-2015, countermanding poll in respect of agriculturists' constituency. 1.2. 1.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned decision of respondent No. 3 in countermanding the poll in respect of agriculturists' constituency only and to continue the poll with respect to other constituency to be scheduled on 4-3-2015, the petitioners have preferred the present Special Civil Application under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for the aforesaid reliefs. 2. Shri B.B. Naik, learned Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that the impugned decision of respondent No. 3-Election Officer to countermand poll in respect of agriculturists' constituency only is absolute illegal and contrary to Rule 24 of the Rules. It is submitted that as per Rule 24 of the Rules, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll as a whole with respect to all the constituencies i.e. countermand poll with respect to all the seats of the market committee, for which, elections are required to be held and the election proceedings with respect to all the constituencies are required to be commenced anew in all respects as if a new election. It is submitted that Rule 24 of the Rules does not provide that poll shall be countermand with respect to the constituency, for which, nominated candidates filled in the form and he died. It is submitted that it would be adding something which is not specifically provided/mentioned in the Rules. Shri Naik, learned Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that as per the cardinal principle of law, a provision is required to be read as it is and nothing is required to be added and/or subtracted. It is submitted, that therefore, when in the Rule it is mentioned that after taking of a poll has become necessary and before the poll is taken and it further provides that the candidate who has been duly nominated dies, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll it means countermand the poll as a whole i.e. with respect to all the constituencies i.e. general election as a whole with respect to all the constituency and is required commenced the election proceedings afresh and a new in all respects as if for new election. It is submitted that as such under the law the election with respect to all the constituencies is required to be held at a time and the election is not held separately with respect to different constituencies. It is submitted that as such under the law the election with respect to all the constituencies is required to be held at a time and the election is not held separately with respect to different constituencies. It is submitted that therefore, when the general election of the market committee is held with respect to all the constituencies, on the eventuality which occurs as provided in Rule 24, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll with respect to general election i.e. with respect to all the constituencies and is required to commence the election proceedings anew with respect to all the constituencies. It is submitted that if that not done and the polling is countermand only with respect to particular constituency, for which, the nominated candidates has died and election with respect to other constituencies is permitted to be held and or go on it may affect the result with respect to other constituency, for which, the election is held thereafter, for which the poll is countermand with respect to only one constituency. Making above submissions, it is requested to allow present Special Civil Application and to grant reliefs as prayed for. 3. Present petition is opposed by Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General for the respondent-State. It is submitted that the impugned decision of the Election Officer to countermand the poll with respect to agriculturists' constituency is absolutely just and proper and in consonance with the provision of Rule 24 of the Rules. It is submitted that provision of statute is required to be read purposively and is required to be read in such a manner that it is workable. 3.1. It is submitted by Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General that the election with respect to all the three constituencies i.e. Agriculturists' Constituency, Traders' Constituency and Co-operative Marketing Constituency are as such in a water-tight compartment and there are three different watertight constituencies and even voters' list is also required to be published separately with respect to all three different constituencies and even voters are also different. It is submitted that therefore, in case of death of one of nominated candidates with respect to one constituency the poll with respect to other constituency is not required to be countermand. It is submitted that therefore, in case of death of one of nominated candidates with respect to one constituency the poll with respect to other constituency is not required to be countermand. It is submitted that even in Rule 24 of the Rules there is no specific mention and/or it does not provide that the Election Officer is required to be countermand the poll with respect to all the constituencies and is required to be commenced the election proceedings with respect to all the three different constituencies. It is submitted, that in a given case, it may happen and it has so happened in the present case that seats with respect to one of the constituency i.e. Co-operative Marketing Constituency are required uncontested. It is submitted that therefore, if contention on behalf of the petitioners is accepted and the election proceedings is required to be commenced with respect to all the constituency in that case, it will affect the candidates with respect to other constituencies, who are declared elected uncontested. It is submitted that even otherwise there is no logic to commence election proceedings with respect to all the constituencies while counter amending poll. It is submitted that if the contention on behalf of the petitioners is accepted, in that case, Rule 24 would unworkable. It is submitted that therefore, while reading down Rule 24 purposively and in a reasonable manner Rule 24 is to be read in such manner that in case of eventuality occurred as mentioned in Rule 24 the poll with respect to the particular constituency, of which, nominated candidates has died is required to be countermand and not with respect to other constituency, for which, nominated candidates who had died has nothing to do. 3.2. It is further submitted by Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State that if the reliefs which are sought in the present petition is granted in favour of the petitioners, in that case, those candidates who are declared uncontested with respect to other constituencies i.e. in the present case Traders' Constituency and Co-operative Marketing Constituency and even those other nominated candidates are likely to be affected while countermanding the poll with respect to other constituencies are not joined as party respondent in the present petition, and therefore, on the aforesaid ground also, no relief may be granted to the petitioners. 3.3. 3.3. It is further submitted by Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State that what is provided in Rule 24 is countermand the poll in case of death of nominated candidates. It is submitted that polls means of actual voting. It is submitted, that therefore, what is provided is countermand the poll i.e. actual voting, and therefore, to give the opportunity to some other candidates to submit the nomination with respect to the seat for which, the nominated candidates submitted the form and who died, the election proceedings are required to be commenced anew. It is submitted, that meaning thereby, the election proceedings are required to be commenced anew with respect to only those constituencies, for which, the candidates who died submitted the nomination. 3.4. It is further submitted by Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State that in the present case as such polling with respect to other constituencies, for which, the election is required to be held has already commenced and is concluded today i.e. 4-3-2015 and the voting/polling with respect to seats of other constituencies had already taken place, and therefore, if any relief as prayed in the present petition is granted, in that case, it is likely to affect other nominated candidates with respect to other constituencies and even likely to interfere with the election programme. It is submitted that even those nominated candidates with respect to other constituencies who are likely to be affected are even not joined as respondent. Making above submissions, it is requested to dismiss the present Special Civil Application. 4. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties at length. At the outset, it is required to be noted that what is challenged in the present petition is the impugned decision of the Election Officer to countermand the poll with respect to agriculturists' constituency in view of death of one of the nominated candidate of the agriculturists' constituency. The aforesaid is challenged by the petitioner contending inter alia that in view of Rule 24, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll with respect to all the constituencies of the market committee and is required to commence the election proceedings afresh and new with respect to all the constituencies. The aforesaid is challenged by the petitioner contending inter alia that in view of Rule 24, the Election Officer is required to countermand the poll with respect to all the constituencies of the market committee and is required to commence the election proceedings afresh and new with respect to all the constituencies. While considering the aforesaid issue, Rule 24, upon which, much reliance has been placed and which will be applicable, reads as under: "Rule 24: Death of candidate before poll: "If after the taking of a poll has become necessary and before the poll is taken, a candidate who has been duly nominated dies, the Election Officer shall, upon being satisfied of the fact of the death of the candidate, countermand the poll and the election proceedings shall be commenced anew in all respects as if for a new election." 5. It is required to be noted that market committee is divided into three constituencies and the members of the managing committee of the market committee are required to be elected from three different constituencies i.e. Agriculturists' Constituency, Traders' Constituency and Co-operative Marketing Constituency. That the said three constituencies consist of 8 seats of Agriculturists' Constituency, 4 seats of Traders' Constituency and 2 seats of Co-operative Marketing constituency. It is also required to be noted that even as per Rule 24, three separate voters' list with respect to aforesaid three constituencies is required to be prepared by the Election Officer and even the voters with respect to all the three constituencies also would be different meaning thereby all the three different constituencies will form different and separate class by themselves who will elect their representatives/director/members from and amongst themselves. 6. On fair reading of Rule 24, while reading down the said provision purposively, in case of death of a nominated candidate before the actual poll takes place, the poll is required to be countermand and the election proceedings with respect to said constituency, for which, the poll is countermand is required to be commenced anew. Rule 24 does not show and/or provide that the poll is required to be countermand of all the constituencies. Even there does not seem to be any logic in countermanding the poll with respect to all the constituencies and to commence the election proceedings afresh and/or new with respect to all the constituencies. Rule 24 does not show and/or provide that the poll is required to be countermand of all the constituencies. Even there does not seem to be any logic in countermanding the poll with respect to all the constituencies and to commence the election proceedings afresh and/or new with respect to all the constituencies. Even in given case, it may happen that with respect to some other constituencies the candidates are declared elected uncontested. In that case, if the election proceedings with respect to all the constituencies is required to be commenced anew as contended on behalf of the petitioners, in that case, those candidates of other constituencies who are declared uncontested shall be affected. There is no logic and/or reason to commence the election proceedings afresh with respect to those constituencies. Under the circumstances, if it is held and/or if Rule 24 is read in a such manner that it would be workable and/or purposive interpretation is made, in that case, it is to be held that in the eventuality as provided under Rule 24 the poll is required to be countermand with respect to constituency, for which, nominated candidate contested and who had died. 6.1. It is required to be noted that as per Rule 24, the poll is required to be countermand on the death of a candidate. As observed herein above, it does not provide that the poll is required to be countermand with respect to all the constituencies. It also does not provide that election proceedings shall be commenced anew with respect to all the constituencies i.e. the constituencies other than the constituencies for which a nominated candidate filled in the form and he had died. Under the circumstances, if the contention on behalf of the petitioners is accepted, in that case, something is to be added which is not permissible. This Court is as such in complete agreement with the submissions made by Shri Naik, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that while considering the provision of statute, the Court is required to consider the same as it is and nothing is required to be added and/or subtracted. However, at the same time reading down the provision of statute purposively is always permissible so as to make the provision workable. 6.2. However, at the same time reading down the provision of statute purposively is always permissible so as to make the provision workable. 6.2. Under the circumstances, the contention on behalf of the petitioners that on the death of a nominated candidate with respect to a constituency, the poll is required to be countermand with respect to all other constituencies and the election proceedings are required to be commenced afresh with respect to all the constituencies has no substance and cannot be accepted. 6.3. It is required to be noted that in the present case as such the poll with respect to other constituencies has already taken place today i.e. 4-3-2015 and as observed hereinabove even the candidates with respect to one of the constituencies i.e. co-operative marketing constituency are already declared uncontested. Therefore, if the contention on behalf of the petitioners is accepted and the relief as prayed for is granted to direct the respondent No. 3 - Authorized Officer to countermand the poll with respect to all the constituencies and to commence the election proceedings afresh/new with respect to all the constituencies, in that case, the candidates who have contested the election for other constituencies and even those who are declared elected uncontested are likely to be affected. Those candidates are not before the Court. All those candidates who are likely to be affected are not joined as party respondents. Under the circumstances also, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief as prayed in the present petition. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present petition fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.