MANMAL Vs. BASANTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking to challenge the election of one Basantilal Sogani as a Councilor to the Municipality at Mahidpur.

(2.) THE Petitioner had filed earlier an election petition under Chapter VIII of the Nagar Palika Parshad (Nirvachan Evam Chunav) Niyam framed under Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act No. 1 of 1954 before the District Judge; Ujjain. In this petition he had assailed Basantilal Sogani's election inter alia on the ground that he was disqualified for being a councilor by reason the provision contained in Section 14(1)(i) of the Madhya Bharat Municipalities Act as he had such tax or dues to which Section 94 of the Act applies standing against his name for a period exceeding one year. The tax dues referred to by the Petitioner were (1) Octroi duty for importing a Tractor, a Trolley and an air compressor within the limits of Mahidpur municipality amounting to Rs. 562 -0 nP (2) Tax, charges or rent for keeping these articles on the Municipal road or land in front of his house for a period exceeding six months amounting to Rs. 22.87 nP.

(3.) THE Petitioner in this petition initially assailed the findings of the learned District Judge on both these points but his earned counsel finally confined his arguments only on the second point. The learned Counsel in this connection has referred to the Petitioner's affidavit para No. 3 wherein he has staled, 'the alegations in the petition para 20 are true to my personal knowledge'. He also filed at the stage of hearing Notification No. 611 18 -6 -53 whereby the President of the Mahidpur Municipality had notified that the Rules framed under Section 45 Jha of the Madhya Bharat Nagar Palika Vidhan, 1954 had been made applicable to Mahidpur Municipality as per letter of the Inspector General of Municipalities dated 10 -5 -1955. A copy of the rules 13, 14 and 15 of the aforesaid rules was also filed to indicate at what rate the tax was livable. On the strength of these documents it is urged that the view taken by the learned District Judge was untenable and that the opponent Sogani was clearly disqualified to become a councilor. He pressed that his election be declared void and that the Petitioner be declared as duly elected to Ward No. 2 for which both he and Basantilal had stood.