Civil Petition No. 4682 of 2017 6 cast in their favour and ordered re-poll in respect of the said polling station which was a corrective measure, and one which was also fair. 6. The petition filed by the petitioners in the High Court could have also been dismissed on the ground that the Election Commission in issuing the said notification had not acted illegally or in a mala fide manner. However, the learned Judge examined the merits of the case as well, and also determined that, “the law does not provide for taking into account the unofficial result prepared by the presiding officer for the purposes of consolidating the final result.” The learned members of the Division Bench of the High Court had also examined the merits of the case though they could have dismissed the ICA on the ground that it was not maintainable in terms of section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 as the matter was first considered by the Election Commission and then by the High Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution, however, this petition is not being dismissed on this ground because this point was not considered in the impugned judgment in the ICA. The learned members of the Division Bench considered the scope of the referred to unofficial results and held, that “the votes of said polling station cannot be verified or counted in the event of a challenge by any of the parties.” 7. The foundation of representative democracy rests on a credible electoral process which in this case had been undermined and the Election Commission proceeded to restore it. In respect of the polling station the record of which was snatched / stolen from the Presiding Officer the Election Commission ordered re-poll, which was an eminently fair decision but nonetheless it was unnecessarily and repeatedly