ICAI Clarifies Manner of writing Arabic numerals in the ballot paper

ICAI Clarifies Manner of writing Arabic numerals in the ballot paper CLARIFICATION Date: 4th December, 2018 Sub.: Manner of writing Arabic n

CLARIFICATION
Date: 4th December, 2018
Sub.: Manner of writing Arabic numerals in the ballot paper Queries are being received from members as to the manner in which the numeral 1 is required to be written while marking preference in the ballot papers. The doubt seems to have arisen as different people have different way of writing the numeral 1 e.g.(1) A voter shall have one vote only, and he shall have as many preferences as there are candidates.
(2) The voter in order to cast his vote:
(a) shall place on his ballot paper the number 1 (in Arabic numerals) in the square opposite the name of the candidate for whom he desires to vote; and
(b) may, in addition, place on his ballot paper the number 2, or the numbers 2 and 3 or the numbers 2, 3 and 4 (in Arabic numerals) and so on in the squares opposite the names of other candidates in the order of his preference, upto the maximum number of preferences available to him under sub-rule (1).
(c) may put `X against whom he has not mentioned any preference.
It is clarified that all the above styles of writing 1 are different fonts or different ways of writing the same Arabic numeral 1 and are valid for the purpose of our election process including treating as valid ballot paper. If the numbers are written in Roman Numbers such as I, II, III, IV and so on or in words such as One, Two, Three, Four and so on or First, Second, Third, Fourth and so on, then only the ballot paper will be treated as invalid. Further, it may be noted that any manner of marking numbers, other than Arabic numerals, will render the ballot paper invalid. The team of officials doing the counting are thorough with the process and have been sensitised about the manner of marking preference.V. Sagar
Returning Officer & Secretary
About Author

CA Deepak Gupta
Co Founder
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
3423My Recent Articles
- UltraTech Cement slapped with Rs. 808.78 Cr Income Tax Demand
- GST: High Court upheld constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c), asks government to address ITC issues of genuine purchasers
- Old vs New Tax Regime for Tax Year 2026-27
- High court criticizes Income Tax Department for not releasing ITR Utilities despite 11 years of directions
- Fino Payments Bank CEO Rishi Gupta Gets Bail in GST Case, Bank Clarifies No Direct Link
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Tags
No tags yet.
Recent Posts

All Posts

Tags
No tags yet.









