BHUBAN MOHAN BASAK Vs. CHAIRMAN, DACCA MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals are against judgments and decrees of the Additional District Judge of Dacca, revering decisions of the Munsif, 4 Court, Dacca, and arise oat of a Municipal election held on the 3 March 1925. One of these suite (Suit No. 802 of 1925) was brought by three rate-payers of the Dacca Municipality to set aside the whole election, while the remaining three suits were instituted by unsuccessful candidates for the purpose of setting aside the election in the particular wards in which they failed. All the suits were decreed by the Court of first instance. On appeal the learned Additional District Judge reversed those decisions and dismissed the suits. The plaintiffs have now appealed to this Court.

(2.) Appeal No. 636, arising out of suit No. 802, in which the entire election is sought to be set aside, may be conveniently dealt with first. The facts are briefly as follows:

(3.) The general election of the Commissioners of the Dacca Municipality was notified to be held on the 14 February 1925 by a notification published in the Calcutta Gazette of 5th November 1924. Thereafter the register of voters, which is kept by the Municipality, was revised and brought up to date according to the rules framed by the Government under the Municipal Act. Thy register was published at the local hanas on 1 December 1924, and, after scrutiny, was published on 31 January 1925. On the same date, at a meeting of the Commissioners, polling officers were appointed for conducting the election on the 14th February 1925. On the 10 February, however, at an ordinary meeting of the commissioners, it was decided to postpone the election to 3 March 1925, on the ground that the final publication of the register had been made less than 15 days before the date fixed for the election, which was in contravention of Rule 5 of the Election Rules. Incidentally it may be observed the commissioners have apparently no power to fix or postpo the date of election, but the commissioner of the division, with whom that power rests, appears to have accepted the decision of the commissioners and notified the 3 March a3 the date of the election. The change of date was duly notified by beat of drum. Thereafter a notice was issued for an extraordinary meeting of the commissioners on 13 February, when fresh polling officers for the new election were appointed and the time and place of, the poll were fixed. The voters register was republished on the same date. The election duly took place on the 3 March according to the revised notification. The plaintiffs. Bhuban Mohan Basak and two others, who are ratepayers of the Dacca Municipality, thereupon instituted a representative suit on behalf of the general body of rate-payers to set aside the election on the ground that in the preparation and publication of the register there had been various illegalities which invalidated the whole election.