New Delhi: Rajiv Yadav, the independent candidate who lost the Gorakhpur-Faizabad Teachers MLC constituency to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) by a thin margin under controversial circumstances, has demanded an investigation into the election by an independent agency. Alleging that the poll was rigged, Yadav also called for the election to be canceled and fresh voting to be conducted. He demanded strict action against the officials involved if an investigation proves his allegations to be true.According to figures released by the Uttar Pradesh Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), the BJP’s Dhruv Kumar Tripathi defeated his closest rival, Yadav, by a margin of a little over 2,200 votes. While Dhruv Kumar Tripathi secured 16,790 votes, Yadav (Independent) received 14,580 votes before being eliminated from the contest.Yadav, alongside Samajwadi Party (SP) candidate Sanjayan Tripathi, had boycotted the counting process after three rounds, alleging that election officials were actively manipulating the process to engineer a win for the BJP candidate.On October 29, Yadav, a geography teacher by profession, dispatched a letter to President Droupadi Murmu, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, demanding that the entire counting process be investigated by an independent agency outside the control of the Uttar Pradesh state government.Yadav asserted that there was an unexpected surge in the 1,612 votes tallied during the fourth round in favour of the BJP candidate. He outlined a series of allegations in his letter, claiming that “rigging” took place right from the initial round of counting, orchestrated by officials deployed at the counting center situated within the Commerce Faculty of Gorakhpur University on October 27.Also read: Pilibhit Voter Roll Irregularities: FIR Against Two SDMs, Computer Operator Over 10,470 EntriesThe Gorakhpur-Faizabad constituency spans 17 districts and encompasses key regions such as Gorakhpur, Ayodhya, and Azamgarh. Gorakhpur serves as the political stronghold of Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath, who had addressed a major public rally in the constituency during the election campaign. Detailing the round-by-round figures, Yadav noted that in the first round of counting (covering 14,000 votes), he received 3,703 votes, while the BJP candidate secured 3,813 votes and the SP candidate gathered 2,744 votes. In the second round, the tally stood at 3,611 for the BJP, 3,754 for Yadav, and 2,743 for the SP. In the third round, the BJP polled 3,487 votes, Yadav 3,830, and the SP candidate got 2,682. However, during the fourth round – in which 1,612 votes were counted – the BJP’s candidate, Tripathi, secured 57.50% of the votes with 927 ballots. In contrast, Yadav received just 128 votes, while SP’s Sanjayan Tripathi got 127.Yadav argued that this dramatic shift in vote percentage between himself and the BJP candidate in the final round clearly pointed toward systematic rigging. He alleged that on all 1,612 ballot papers in the fourth round, the first-preference (‘1’) votes cast in favour of every candidate other than the BJP candidate had been fraudulently altered to a ‘4’, while the blank preference space beside Dhruv Tripathi’s name was marked with a ‘1’, leaving visible marks of overwriting.Yadav pointed out that in most first-preference ballot papers belonging to candidate Ajay Singh, the second-preference vote recorded for the BJP candidate appeared to have been written with a completely different pen. He demanded that the 1,612 ballot papers from the fourth round, as well as the first-preference ballots of candidate Ajay Singh, be subjected to forensic and handwriting examination to determine whether the paper ballots had been tampered with.Yadav raised several other irregularities regarding the conduct of the election. He claimed that all disputed ballots marked in his favor that were submitted to the Returning Officer (RO) for evaluation were systematically declared invalid, whereas similar disputed ballots favouring the BJP candidate were accepted as valid. Consequently, nearly 2,800 votes were declared invalid – a figure he described as unprecedented. “Teachers voted in this election. Don’t they know how to write out the numbers correctly?” he asked.He also alleged discrepancies in specific polling booths: at Booth No. 115 in Mau, 52 more votes were found inside the ballot box than were recorded in the ballot paper account maintained by the Presiding Officer. At Booth No. 111 in Bargaon, the paper seal on the ballot box was found broken, while the ballot box from Booth No. 86 at the Bankata Block Panchayat lacked a paper seal altogether.Also read: Akhilesh Yadav’s SP Makes Gains in Uttar Pradesh Council Polls, Puts BJP on NoticeYadav also alleged procedural bias during announcements. He noted that after the first round, the Returning Officer announced the complete vote tallies for all candidates over the microphone when the BJP candidate held the lead. Following the second and third rounds, when Yadav had taken the lead, the votes cast for candidates were read out, but his lead was conspicuously omitted from the announcement. However, as soon as the BJP candidate regained the lead in the fourth round through alleged fraud, the candidate’s lead and total vote count were immediately announced over the public address system.Yadav further said that when the votes in the fourth round began swinging “unilaterally in favour” of the BJP candidate, all contesting candidates boycotted the counting hall and walked out. Following their exit, the returning officer (RO), assistant returning officer (ARO), and police personnel present applied pressure on him, stating that if he wanted the counting to be completed in his presence he should remain, otherwise the final results would be declared in the absence of any candidate agents, said Yadav. He requested that the entire counting record, CCTV footage of the strong room, video recordings of the process, and the counted paper ballots be preserved immediately.Uttar Pradesh CEO Navdeep Rinwa had previously acknowledged the public complaints and counting boycott reported on X by contesting candidates, seeking an official explanation from the Gorakhpur-Faizabad returning officer. Responding to the inquiry, the Gorakhpur divisional commissioner maintained that counting was conducted under continuous personal supervision of an Election Commission of India (ECI)-appointed observer. The commissioner added that candidate representatives had scrutinised every stage of counting and that round-wise results were publicly announced in their presence.Omar Rashid is an independent journalist.