AHMED HUSSAIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application presented by Ahamed Hussain (Mohammed Kunju) residing in Valiakaikara, Pallithottam, Quilon, against three respondents, 1) The State of Travancore Cochin, 2). The Municipal Commissioner, Quilon Municipality, and 3) Easa Sait (Yacoob Sait) Kapa Azhikom, Beach Ward (East, Quilon) respectively under Art.226 of the Constitution of India "to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the District Collector, Order L.Dis. 13507/52/LSG dated 2-1-1953 rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner and also the order of the 1st respondent L.S. (E-12) 3/53/EHLSG dated 5th January 1953 dismissing the petition filed by this petitioner and also to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 2nd respondent to include the petitioner's name in the list of duly nominated candidates and to proceed with the election only after the petitioner's name is so included as a duly nominated candidate for election to the Andamukhom South Ward of the Quilon Municipality in the election to the Municipal Council which is fixed to take place on 23-1-1953 or on any other date to which the election may be adjourned thereafter." The decision of the 2nd respondent accepting the nomination paper presented by the petitioner was made the subject matter of appeal by the 3rd respondent to the District Collector, Quilon under R.9 of the Rules framed under S.323 of the Travancore District Municipalities Act, XXIII of 1116 and published in the Gazette dated 4th November, 1952. The order of the District Collector, a certified copy of which is produced along with this application shows that the applicant is disqualified to be elected as a Councillor under S.52, Clause (1)(b)(v) of the Travancore District Municipalities Act which provides that:

(2.) The Election Officer accepted the nomination paper of the applicant applying S.8(10) of Act XXIII of 1116 (Travancore) which provides that:

(3.) The, petitioner sought redress by approaching the Government. A copy of the order passed by the Government is also produced by the petitioner. Therein it is stated that "R.40 of the Rules relied upon by the petitioner and his advocates has no application" because no question of interpretation of any rule arises and it is not a case of the election being held in contravention of the rules. The copy of the petition is not produced but from the contents of the Government order it has to be gathered that the petitioner's prayers and allegations related to the validity of the order passed by the District Collector apart from the interpretation of the Rules also.