LexMANGOO SINGH versus THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL, BAREILLY AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
418 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 1958 1957 of this case. The erroneous view that the learned Bakshish Singh Sessions Judge took of the dying declaration and of Tile srat:·of Punjab the oral evidence were compelling enough reasons for - the reversal of that judgment. Ka~r~ , We therefore dismiss this appeal. 1957 September 17. Appeal dismissed. MANGOO SINGH v. THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL, BAREILL Y AND OTHERS (BHAGWATI, S.K. DAS and GAJENDRAGADKAR; JJ.) Election dispute-Municipal election-Disqualification for membership-Arrears of tax-Payment after nomination but before po/1-"For being chosen as", "D8fnand", meaning of-U. P. Munici- palities ·Act, 1916 (U. P. ll of 1916), ss. 13-D, cl. (g), 166, 168- U. P. Municipalities (Condcuct of Election of Members) Order, 1953, para. 22(2). The appellant was elected to the Municipal Board under the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916. He was in arrears in the payment of Municipal tax in excess of one year's demand, to which s. 166 of the Act applied, at the time of the filing of nominations, but made the payment before the date of the poll. Under section 130, cl. (g) of the Act "a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being a member of a board if he is in arrears in the payment of Municipal tax or other dues in excess of one year's demand to which s. 166 applies, provided that the disqualification shall cease as soon as the arrears are paid." On an election ·peti- tion filed by a defeated candidate, the election was set aside by the Election Tribunal on the ground that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of the proviso to s. 13-D, cl. (g) of the Act. It was contended for the appellant that the relevant date for the operation of the disqualification was the date of the poll and that in any case, he did not come within the mischief of the disqualifi- cation clause in that section, as a bill for payment of the tax was not presented to him, nor a notice of demand served on him under s. 168. . Held : (1) that if a person is disqualified on the date of nomi- nation, he cannot be chosen as a candidate within the meaning of s. 13-D of the U.P. Municipalities Act. 1916, because the disquali- fication attaches to him on that date and the process of choosing consist of a series of steps starting with nomination and ending with the announcement of the election, The wiping off of the S.C.R. SUPEREME COURT REPORTS 419 disqualification has no retrospective effect, and the disqualifica- 1957 tion which subsisted on the date of the nomination cannot cease to Mangoo Singh subsist on that day by reason .of a. subsequent .payment of the v. arrears of Municipal tax. • Th• Ekction • · · · Tribunal, Bareilly ChatturbhuJ Vltha/das Jasam v. Moreshwar Parashram and and Others Others, (1954) S.C.R. 817, N. P. Ponnuswami v. The Returning Officer, Namakka/ Constitutency and Others, (1952) S.C.R: 218 and Harford v. Linskey, (1899) I Q. B. 852, relied on. Ahmed Hossain v. Aswini Kumar, A.I.R. 1953 Cal. 542, approved. (2) that the expression "to which s. 166 applies" in s. 13-D, d. (g) of the Act merely describes the nature or type of dues mentioned in tha~ section and that the effect is that the demand referred to in s. 13-D cl. (g) must be of that nature or type. (3) that the word "demand" in s. 13-D, cl. (g) of the Act means "claim" or "due" and only refers to the amount of arrears or dues on which the disqualification depends and does not attract the operation of s. 168. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1957. Appeal from the judgment and order dated the 30th August, 1955, of the Allahabad High Court in SpeCial Appeal No.8 of f955 arising out of the Judgment and order dated the lOth December, 1954, of the ·Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc. Writ No. 1245 of 1954. R.S. Narula,, for the appellant. B.B. Tawa~ley and K. P. Gupta, for the respondent. 1957. September 17. The following Judgmc-nt of the court was delivered by · S.K. DAs, J.-This appeal has been preferred to .this s. K. Das J. Court on the strength of a certificate granted by the High Court of Allahabad on February 3, 1956, to the effect that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court under Art. 133 (1) (c) of the Constitu- tion. The question that falls for 4ecision is the true scope, meaning and effect of cl. (g) of s. 13-D of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 (U.P. II of 1916), herein-
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.