Arguments on behalf of EClet’s know
Arguments on behalf of EC…let’s know…Avinash Desai argued on behalf of EC. The lawyer argued that the order given by the ec is applicable only to the employees who have exercised their right to vote through postal ballot at the facilitation centers due to election duties.At these centers, the attesting officer is appointed by the RO...so if the signature of the attesting authority is sufficient on the Form 13A... there is no need to have the name, designation and seal of that officer. It was explained that in the case of other postal ballot votes, Group-A and Group-B officials do attestation...but on Form-13A related to postal ballots of employees on election duty, the attestation is done by the officer appointed by the RVO. Courts cannot interfere during the counting of votes. If there are any objections to the election, it is advised to file a petition after the process is over.After hearing the arguments of both sides, the judges said that the verdict will be issued after six o'clock on saturday evening. Jagan's promises to employees and teachers during the last election, including cancellation of CPC, were not fulfilled....they tried to suppress the employees' movement. Because of this, they are all strongly against Vaikapa. A majority of the postal ballot votes of over five and a half lakh are likely to be against the YCP. That's why ycp is leaning on these postal ballot votes from the beginning.