DAYAL Vs. COLLECTOR NAGAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three writ applications have been referred to us by a learned Single Judge and raise an interesting question as to the interpretation of R. 14 of the Rajasthan Panchayat and Nyaya Panchayat Election Rules, 1960, hereinafter called the Rules, made under sec. 89 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (Act No. XXX of 1953), hereinafter called the Act of 1953. As the question involved is the same in all these applications, we propose to dispose of them by a single judgment.

(2.) BY Writ Application No. 5 of 1961 of the election held for the Rhoknar Panchayat, on 26th December, 1960, has been questioned; whereas by Writ Application No. 6 of 1961 the election called in question pertains to Panchayat, Jusari, and by Writ Application No. 37 of 1961 the election questioned pertains to Panchayat, Kinsaria both these last mentioned elections having been held on the 25th cum 26th Dec, 1961 respectively. The grounds on which these elections are challenged are two in number. The first ground is that according to R. 14 of the Rules the notice calling upon the electors in these electoral areas was not published in the State Gazette but what was done was that a notice was issued by the Collector in each case and it was published in each of the wards of the electoral areas by being pasted in conspicuous places therein. The contention of learned counsel is that the requirement of R. 14 is that the notice of election should have been published in the Official Gazette, and, therefore, this rule was breached when no such notice was published in the manner required. Learned counsel in this connection laid great stress on the meaning of the word "notification" and contended that the meaning of this word, according to Cl. (48) of sec. 32 of Rajasthan Gen. Clauses Act, is that the notification must have been published in the Gazette by competent authority. The second contention is that the various notices calling upon the wards in the panchayats concerned to go to poll show that they were not signed by the Collector and, therefore, these notices were not valid within the meaning of R. 14. These writ applications have been opposed, before us, on behalf of some of the Punchas who have been declared successful at the elections, as also by the State.