AWADH BEHARI PANDEY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner, who is a Councillor of Maihar Municipal Council, challenges the legality of the election of the non-applicant No. 4 Inayatullah Khan as President of the Council. He seeks a declaration that the election is invalid and prays that the proceedings of the meeting culminating in the election of the non-applicant No. 4 as the President be quashed by the issue of a writ of certiorari.

(2.) THE election under challenge was held on the death of one Sunderlal who was the President of the Council and who died on 2lst June 1967. It was held at a meeting of the Council convened on 22nd July 1967 and presided over by the Sub-Divisional Officer of Maihar.

(3.) THIRDLY, it was submitted that in the notice which was issued by the Presiding Officer under rule 3 inviting nomination papers, it was stated that nomination papers should be delivered on 21st July 1967 between the hours of 11 a. m. and 3 p. m.; that this was contrary to the mandatory provisions of rule 4 fixing the hours between eleven in the forenoon and four in the afternoon for presentation of nomination papers. It was said that there was thus non-compliance of rule 4 and, therefore, the election held on 22nd July 1967 was invalid. This contention must be rejected in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Govind Rao and another v. State of M. P. and 3 others. 1968 MPLJ 634 (Miac. Petition No. 371 of 1966 decided on 11th October, 1966).. In that case also, a similar objection was raised by a Councillor who was not able to show that a nomination paper presented by him after the hours specified in the notice issued under rule 3 (2) but during the period prescribed by rule 4 was rejected.