An order to this effect was passed by Justice Surinder Sarup while dismissing Parmar's application in which the MLA had urged the court to dismiss the election petition at the threshold.

Justice Sarup held that the election petition did not suffer from any legal infirmity and decided to proceed with the controversy on merits.

Parmar had pleaded that the election petition filed by the Congress candidate Jagjiwan Pal, who lost by a narrow margin of 125 votes, lacked material particulars. It was contended that the petition disclosed no cause of action.

The court observed that the election result had been challenged on the grounds of improper reception of votes in favour of Parmar. There were also irregularities alleged during counting as the votes in favour of the Congress candidate were allegedly mixed with the votes of the returned candidate.

The petitioner's counsel Inder Singh pointed out that the facts stated in the election petition were supported by videography at the time of counting. The video shows that the counting staff was visibly tired and sleepy after more than 24 hours of duty at a stretch.

The election petition alleged that there was possibility in which 125 votes were counted in favour of the returned candidate wrongly, which has affected the election results. The Congress candidate is seeking a declaration that he was duly elected in place of Parmar.

Another ground taken in the petition is that as the difference between the two leading candidates was less than one per cent of the total votes, the result could not have been declared without prior approval of the Election Commission.