MADHUKAR G E PANKAKAR CHANDRAKANT MAHADEO PRADHAN Vs. JASWANT CHOBBILDAS RAJANI:DILIP SADASHIV DEHERKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -The first two civil appeals based on admitted, abbreviated facts, revolving round the election of the President of the Bassein Council (and the third raises virtually the samepoint but refers to the Bhibandi Municipal Council) under the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 (the Municipal Act, for short) has led to long andintricate argument, thanks partly to the haziness and incongruity of the statutory provisions, and the hard jobof harmonizing and illumining which, by interpretative effort, has drained us of our faith in the blessings of simplicity, certainty and consistency in Indian codified law. We may pardonably, but hopefully, permit ourselves by wayof constructive criticism of perfunctory codification - a proliferating source of litigation- that it was once thought.

(2.) Election law has necessarily to be statutory, but a code can be clear in its scheme and must be such that litigation-proof elections should become the rule. Legislative nemesis, in the shape of ambiguity- induced litigation is a serious political misfortune in the area of elections where laymen go to the polls and people's verdicts get bogged down in court disputes, attendedwith desperate delays! Some intelligent care at thedrafting stage, some vision of the whole scheme in the farmers, will reduce resort to legal quarrels and appellate spirals so that the time consumed in this Court in resolving conflicts of construction in comparatively less important legislations can be spared for more substantial issues of generalpublic importance.

(3.) One Shri Rajani, a candidate for Presidentship of the Bassein Municipal Council and Shri Samant, a voterin that municipal area, made common cause and filed two election petitions challenging the declaration in favour of the appellant. Dr. Parulekar, who was the successful candidate, winning by a largeplurality of votes.