ORDER : 1. Election Petition No. 5 of 2018 is filed by the petitioner under Sections 80 and 80-A r/w. Sections 100, 101, 123 and other relevant provisions of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (for brevity “RP ACT”) for the relief claimed in para 10 as under:- (A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to summon the records of the election of the 107-Botad Constituency of Gujarat State Legislative Assembly, 2017 and after full-fledged trial, be pleased to declare the election of 07-Botad Constituency of Gujarat State Legislative Assembly, 2017 as void u/s. 100 of the RP Act, 1951 and be pleased to set aside the result declared in Form No. 20 and 21-E on 18.12.2017 and further be pleased to declare the Petitioner as Returned candidate 07-Botad Constituency of Gujarat State Legislative Assembly, 2017 in exercise of powers conferred under Section 101 of the RP Act, 1951. (B) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that the petitioner has received a majority of valid votes in the election of 07-Botad Constituency of Gujarat State Legislative Assembly, 2017 and be pleased to declare the election of returned candidate as void and the petitioner may be declared as duly elected candidate. (C) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that the Respondent No. 5 has committed corrupt practices defined under Section 123(7) of the RP Act, 1951 in the election of 07-Botad Constituency of Gujarat State Legislative Assembly, 2017 and but for such corrupt practice, the respondent No. 5 would not have received the more votes than to the petitioner. (D) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that the persons/staff deputed on election duty were guilty of non compliance of statutory provisions of the RP Act, 1951 and the Conduct Rules, 1961 and the orders/guidelines/directions issued by/on behalf of the Election Commission of India for the conduct of the election and such non compliance have materially affected the result of election of 07-Botad Constituency of Gujarat State Legislative Assembly, 2017 as void and the petitioner be declared as elected candidate. (E) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that there are discrepancies in-entering the number of voters in Form No. 17-A, filling up the details in Form No. 17-C and displaying actual votes recorded in EVMs and be pleased to direct the respondent Nos. (E) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that there are discrepancies in-entering the number of voters in Form No. 17-A, filling up the details in Form No. 17-C and displaying actual votes recorded in EVMs and be pleased to direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to re-count the votes through paper slips of VVPT of each Polling Station in presence of the contesting candidates or their agents under the supervision of any independent officer that may be appointed by this Hon'ble Court and further be pleased to order to change the result sheet accordingly. (F) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that inspection of postal ballet was not permitted to the petitioner at the time of counting and be pleased to direct the respondent No. 1 and 2 to recount the Postal Ballots to the petitioner or his agent under the supervision of an independent officer that may be appointed by this Hon'ble Court and further be pleased to order to change the result sheet accordingly. (G) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to award the cost of this petition to the petitioner. 2. Election Application No. 11 of 2019 is filed by the main contesting respondent No. 5 for rejection of Plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity “CPC”) r/w. Section 81, 83, 100, 101 and 123 of the RP Act with following reliefs as prayed for in Para 20: (A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow the present application and further be pleased to reject the aforesaid Election Petition No. 5 of 2018 on the ground that the same fails to disclose any cause of action and is not in conformity with the statutory provisions of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 and Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. 3. Election Application No. 13 of 2019 is filed by the original petitioner under Section 109 of the RP Act for the relief as claimed in Para 6 as under:- (A) Your Lordship may be pleased to permit the applicant to withdraw Election Petition No. 5 of 2018 without ordering payment of costs upon the applicant to the respondents. 4. On presentation of Election Application No. 13 of 2019, this Court has vide order dated 15.11.2019 at Para 4, 6, 7 and 8 recorded as under: “4. Mr. 4. On presentation of Election Application No. 13 of 2019, this Court has vide order dated 15.11.2019 at Para 4, 6, 7 and 8 recorded as under: “4. Mr. Devan Parikh, learned Senior Counsel for main contesting Party-Respondent No. 5 has no objection if the petition is withdrawn by the petitioner and has not pressed for any cost. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Devan Parikh for the respondent No. 5 further submitted that the copy of final order of the withdrawal of the petition be intimated to all the candidates/other respondents, who are joined in the petition and also to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for their perusal. 6. The application for withdrawal is filed, which is supported by the affidavit, wherein on oath it is stated in Para No. 5 that decision of not prosecuting the petition is independent decision of the applicant and not induced by any bargaining or undue consideration. It is further stated that the applicant herein has not taken any undue advantage by filing the election petition and by withdrawing this petition. 7. This Court has considered the contents of the EP 5/18 as well as this Application and the submissions made by the learned advocates for the parties. This Court has also considered the provisions of Section 109 and 110 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (R.P. Act for short) and relevant provisions of Order 23 of the Civil Procedure Code. 8. In view of the above, issue Notice of application for withdrawal to all the parties to the petition and also publish in the official gazette, returnable on 06.12.2019.” 5. On 07.01.2020 this Court has vide order dated 07.01.2020 at Para 2, 3 and 4 as under:- “2. On perusing the record, it appears that notice is not issued by the registry for publication in Gazette. 3. The registry has informed that due to mistake of the clerk notice for publication was not issued. 4. Issue fresh NOTICE for publication be issued as per the order dated 15.11.2019, returnable on or before 05.02.2020. The registry shall submit the copy of Gazette on record.” 6. Today when the matter is called out, learned Advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Rathod for the learned Advocate Mr. Mehul Rathod, for the petitioner and the learned Advocate Mr. 4. Issue fresh NOTICE for publication be issued as per the order dated 15.11.2019, returnable on or before 05.02.2020. The registry shall submit the copy of Gazette on record.” 6. Today when the matter is called out, learned Advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Rathod for the learned Advocate Mr. Mehul Rathod, for the petitioner and the learned Advocate Mr. Saurabh J. Amin for the main contesting respondent No. 5 (Respondent No. 3 in Election Application No. 13 of 2019) are present. 7. Cause list reflects that the Notice of application for withdrawal has been published in the Government Gazette dated 08.01.2020. Cause list further reflects that though the notice of this application is duly served upon Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 to 24 they have not remained present either in person or through advocate. 8. This Court has perused the provisions of the RP Act and on perusal of the record of the case following position emerges:- (a) The Election Petition is filed by sole petitioner no other person is joined as petitioner. Therefore, provisions of Section 110(1) of the RP Act is complied with. (b) The Election Application No. 13 of 2019 for withdrawal of Election Petition No. 5 of 2018 is filed along with supporting affidavit wherein on oath it is affirmed at Para 5 that decision of not prosecuting the petition is independent decision of the applicant not induced by any bargaining or undue consideration. It is further affirmed that the applicant herein has not taken any undue advantage by filing the election petition and by withdrawing this petition. No one has controverted this fact. Hence, it is reason to believe that withdrawal application has not been induced by any bargaining or consideration. Thus, Section 100(2) of the RP Act is complied with. (c) On perusal of the record of the case, if is further found that in the main Election Petition No. 5 of 2018 Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are deleted and though the notice upon respondent Nos. 3, 4, 6 to 24 are duly served, they have not chosen to appear in the Election Petition either in person or through an advocate, therefore, this Court has passed an order dated 25.10.2019, to decide the petition ex-parte against Respondent No. 3,4 and 6 to 26 under Order-9 Rule 6(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Code. 3, 4, 6 to 24 are duly served, they have not chosen to appear in the Election Petition either in person or through an advocate, therefore, this Court has passed an order dated 25.10.2019, to decide the petition ex-parte against Respondent No. 3,4 and 6 to 26 under Order-9 Rule 6(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Code. (d) As recorded in order dated 15.11.2019 at Para-4 main contesting party i.e. respondent No. 5 (Respondent No. 3 in Election Application No. 13 of 2019) has no objection if the petition is withdrawn by the petitioner and he has not pressed for any cost. Today also learned advocate for the respondent No. 5 has reiterated that he has no objection for withdrawal of petition and not pressed for any cost. Therefore, there is no question of order to pay cost of any respondents thereto incurred by them under Section 100(3)(a) of the RP Act. (e) This Court has passed an order on 15.11.2019 to publish the notice of application for withdrawal of Election Petition No. 5 of 2018 in Government Gazette. The same is published in Government Gazette No Extra No. 4 Vol. LXI Wednesday January 8, 2020 Part IV-C at Page No. 4 under Section 100(3)(b) of the RP Act. (f) Though the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 to 24 are duly served and notice of withdrawal of petition has been published in the Government Gazette on 08.01.2020 and more than 14 days have been passed, no objection/application/representation opposing the withdrawal of petition or application for substitution as petitioner in place of the party withdrawing under Section 100(3) (c) of the RP Act is received till date. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the case and discussion made here-in-above, this court is of the opinion that the withdrawal application has not been induced by any bargain or consideration. The conditions for withdrawal of petition under the provisions of the RP Act are satisfied therefore application for withdrawal of the Election Petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order is passed: FINAL ORDER: (A) Election Application No. 13 of 2019 is hereby allowed and the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the Election Petition No. 5 of 2018. Accordingly, Election Petition No 5 of 2018 stands disposed of as withdrawn. Notice is discharged. Hence, the following order is passed: FINAL ORDER: (A) Election Application No. 13 of 2019 is hereby allowed and the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the Election Petition No. 5 of 2018. Accordingly, Election Petition No 5 of 2018 stands disposed of as withdrawn. Notice is discharged. (B) In view of withdrawal of main Election Petition No. 5 of 2018, Election Application No. 11 of 2019 does not survive, hence, no orders are required to be passed. Accordingly Election Application No. 11 of 2019 stands disposed. (C) No orders as to costs. (D) The Registry is directed to issue writ of withdrawal to all the respondents in the petition and also respondent No. 1 and 2 and report the Election Commission, and thereupon the Election Commission shall publish the report in the Official Gazette under Section 111 of the RP Act. (E) The Registry is further directed to take necessary action in accordance with the Provisions of Rule 305 of the Gujarat High Court, Rules, 1993.