KANCHANLAL BRIJLAL PATEL Vs. KEKI RUSTOMJI DAVAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . The powers of the District Court dealing with an election petition are to be found in Sec. 14 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act. Sub-section (5) deals with various grounds regarding the existence of which the Judge being satisfied the Judge may set aside the election. Certainly the non-compliance with the provisions of Sec. 7(2) of the Act does not fall in any of those Grounds there. This brings me to sub-sec. (7) of sec. 14 of the Act which is reproduced below:

(2.) . Coming to the ward No. 6 we find that there were three contestants out of which two contestants got elected by getting 696 and 670 votes as against 502 votes obtained by the unsuccessful candidats. The unsuccessful candidate does not make any grievance before this Court. What I have stated above with respect to the Ward No. 4 would equally apply to this Ward also. In the Ward No. 7 Hiralal Modi was elected-on the general seat by securing 1506 votes whereas Gaurang Patel secured 421 votes the margin of difference being 1085 votes. The second seat was reserved for Scheduled Tribe Candidate. The successful candidate got 1407 votes as against 265 votes procured by his counter- part. Similarly. the third seat was reserved for a woman candidate. One Sumanben secured 1449 votes whereas her rival candidate got only 313 votes the margin of difference being 1138 votes. In Ward No. 7 only 82 houses were added but there was corresponding removal of the huts also. Here also it cannot be said that any material prejudice had been caused even conceivably.

(3.) . In above view of the matter I reject this Special Civil Application by discharging the rule with no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.