P. M. V. SAMRI UTTAR PS 221
Candidate Name 3- Vinay Shankar Tiwari
SPSP170 votes at this polling station
over Candidate Name 2- Rajesh Tripathi (BJP)
The electorate
Vote share in this booth
Candidates at this booth
| # | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Candidate Name 3- Vinay Shankar Tiwari | SP | 170 | 41.46% | |
| 2 | Candidate Name 2- Rajesh Tripathi | BJP | 148 | 36.10% | |
| 3 | Candidate Name 1- Rajendra Singh Urf Pahalwan Singh | BSP | 87 | 21.22% | |
| 4 | Candidate Name 7- Ravindra | JAP | 3 | 0.73% | |
| 5 | Candidate Name 6- Poonam Gupta | ASPKR | 1 | 0.24% | |
| 6 | Candidate Name 4- Soniya Shukla | NCP | 1 | 0.24% | |
| 7 | Candidate Name 5- Chintamani Pandey | BASP | 0 | 0.00% | |
| 8 | Candidate Name 8- Subhash Chandra Dubey Gorakhpuri | RJBVP | 0 | 0.00% | |
| 9 | Candidate Name 9- Suraj Kumar | AAP | 0 | 0.00% |
Share is each candidate's votes over the 410 votes counted at this station, computed here from the candidate rows themselves — the source publishes no booth total of its own on this table.
Party status in this booth
Strong, Average, Weak and Poor are the source's own classification of a party's performance in a booth, carried through unchanged — we neither assign nor recompute them.
| Party | Votes | % of booth | Rank here | Booth rank for party | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SP | 170 | 40.96% | 1 | 164 | Strong |
| BJP | 148 | 35.66% | 2 | 330 | Average |
| BSP | 87 | 20.96% | 3 | 223 | Weak |
| JAP | 3 | 0.72% | 4 | 99 | Poor |
| NCP | 1 | 0.24% | 6 | 374 | Poor |
| ASPKR | 1 | 0.24% | 5 | 422 | Poor |
| BASP | 0 | 0.00% | 8 | 375 | Poor |
| AAP | 0 | 0.00% | 7 | 430 | Poor |
| RJBVP | 0 | 0.00% | 9 | 417 | Poor |
"Booth rank for party" is this station's position among every booth that party contested in AC 328, as ranked by the source.
Where this comes from
Polling-station Form 20 sheets for Uttar Pradesh, 2022 Vidhan Sabha. Booth data is Uttar Pradesh only: the source tables key on assembly-constituency number and carry no state column, so nothing here should be read as national coverage.