MUHAMMAD BAKSH Vs. MUHAMMAD ABDUL BAQI KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the Municipal election held in March last in Allahabad one Khan Bahadur Muhammad Abdul Baqi Khan was a candidate, and was subsequently declared to have been duly elected for some years he, with otter members of his family, had held a contract for the supply of kerosine oil in bulk to the Municipal Board. He was a member of the Board, whose term of office came recently to an end, and he had some three years ago disclosed the existence of that contract to the Commissioner and had been duly given permission to hold the same. He sat as a duly elected member throughout the period of the last Municipal Board. When he deemed himself to have been duly elected this year he again sought and obtained the permission of the Commissioner to carry out the contract notwithstanding his membership of the Board. A petition to unseat him is now in course of hearing by the Commissioner; and, amongst other grounds, it is alleged that he was disqualified from becoming a candidate for election, and that his election is consequently of no effect because he was at the time a person who, under Section 16 (3)(c), held a place of profit in the gift or disposal of the Municipal Board."

(2.) The Commissioner has referred this point to us for our determination. The argument put forward by the petitioners is that the words place of profit were deliberately chosen as a compendious, all embracing phrase to cover every recognised ground of disqualification such as are to be found in the Indian Acts in pari materia. In support of that argument Dr. Katju has referred us to the Bombay Municipal Act (III of 1901) where amongst other provisions, disabilities attach to a Municipal Officer or servant, a licensed Surveyeer or plumber, or one who has directly or indirectly by himself or through his partner any share or interest in any contract or employment with or under or by or on behalf of the Municipality. Section 39 of the Calcutta Municipal Pet has exactly similar disqualifying provisions. The Madras Municipal Act also affirms the inability of a person seeking election who" has interest in any contract made or work done for the Corporation.

(3.) Therefore, had this question which we are called upon to decide arisen in any election to which the Bombay, Calcutta or. Madras Acts applied the position would be clear the respondent would, by the very words of either of these Acts have been disqualified for election. Here how ever we have to consider the words of the Local Municipal Act which are said to include the case of a man having a contract or interest in a contract with the Board. The question which we have to decide is whether it would be a fair construction of Section 16(3)(c) to say that on a reasonable rendering of the words place of profit in the gift or disposal for the Municiapl Boardcover an ordinary commercial contract. The words place of profit have a definite historical association and when coupled with the word office are familiar to all students of constitutional history The Act of Settlement, 12 and 13 William III Chapter II, Section 3 provides that upon the accession of the House of Brunswick no person holding any office or place of profit under the King should be capable of serving as a member of the House of Commons, the phrase recurs in the Act of Settlement of 4 Anne and in 6 Anne, Chapter XLI