SARADISH RAY Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONERS OF SURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application which relates to the election of the Municipal Commissioners of the Suri Municipality in the district of Birbhum. This election is scheduled to be held on 19-3-195S. The petitioner is a voter residing within the precincts of the said Municipality. It is admitted that his name is in the electoral roll. This Eule was issued at his instance on 7-3-1956 upon the opposite parties to show cause why a Writ in the nature of Mandamus should not issue directing the opposite-parties Nos. 1 to 4 to cancel, withdraw and/or forbear from giving effect to the electoral roll of the said Municipality and to prepare the preliminary electoral roll afresh and/or why a Writ in the nature of Certiorari should not be issued setting aside the said electoral roll already prepared or why such further or other order or orders should not be made as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

(2.) As I have just now stated, the election has been fixed on Monday, the 19th March 1956, and the final electoral roll was published as far ago as on 19-12-1955 preceded by the preliminary electoral roll. The petitioner states that the preliminary electoral roll was compiled perfunctorily and with serious irregularity. According to him, whole categories of person qualified to vote have been left out, and about five thousand persons entitled to be enrolled on the ground of educational qualifications, and a further number of persons who are tax-payers, have been left out. It is said that the Rikshaw pullers, and owners of rikshaws, who arc-considerable in number have been excluded. The only step that the petitioner took before coming to this Court for relief was an alleged representation, which is stated to have been sent to the Minister, Local Self Government, Government of West Bengal, and mentioned in para 11 of the petition. A copy of the same is stated to be annexed, to the petition but unfortunately it is not. The grounds as made out for interfering' with the conduct of the election, which has been fixed as aforesaid, are that the preliminary electoral roll has been prepared with serious irregularity and that the total exclusion of categories of persons having educational qualification proves mala fides on the part of the registering authority. It is also said that dead persons and also minors have been included in the preliminary roll. A copy of the preliminary roll has been annexed to the petition and a copy of the final electoral roll has been produced at the hearing. I direct that the final electoral roll be also marked as an exhibit and filed as a part of record. 'The position therefore in short is as follows.

(3.) The petitioner is a voter and he is certainly interested in the conduct of the ensuing election. He has not taken any steps for rectifying the preliminary or the final electoral roll in accordance with the rules which have been framed under powers granted by the Bengal Munipal Act. The only demand for justice which he has made is an alleged representation which has been made to the Minister, for Local Self Government, Government of West Bengal. The question is whether under these circumstances, it is possible for him to get relief in this application. Apart from this, the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents has taken a preliminary objection that this application is misconceived because, taken as an application for a Writ of Mandamus there is no prior demand for justice and taken as a Writ of Certiorari it does not lie because the impugned acts of the respondents were purely in an administrative capacity. He has taken a further point that this petition is defective, firstly because it has not been signed by the petitioner, and secondly because the affidavit of verification has been affirmed not by the petitioner but by a "friend" of his and he says that in an application for a high prerogative Writ such an affidavit is not permissible.