NANHOO MAL Vs. HIRA MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) To fill up a casual vacancy in the office of the President of the Municipal Board, Soron in the district of Etah in Uttar Pradesh, the District Magistrate issued notices to the members of the Board informing them that nomination papers should be filed in his office by 26th of September 1974 and if necessary the election will take place on 1st October, 1974. The 1st respondent thereupon filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the procedure adopted by the District Magistrate for holding the election and prayed for an order to the District Magistrate not to hold the election on 1st October, 1974. The election programme had been notified in the U. P. Gazette dated 21-9-74 but it was published in the Gazette dated 24-9-74,

(2.) The objection to the procedure for election was based on the allegation that it did not conform to the provisions of Rule 6 of the U. P. Municipalities (Conduct of Election of Presidents and Election Petitions) Order, 1964 which reads as follows:

(3.) We are of the opinion that the whole approach of the learned Judges of the High Court to this problem was mistaken. After the decision of this court in N. P. Ponnuswami v. Returning officer, Namakkal constituency. (1952) 3 SCR 218 there is hardly any room for Courts to entertain application under Article 226 of the Constitution in matters relating to elections. Before dealing with this question we may set out Section 43-B of the U. P. Municipalities Act which is the provision of law dealing with cases where the election of the President is questioned: