NANHOO MAL & ORS. versus HIRA MAL & ORS.

Citation: [1976] 1 S.C.R. 809 · Decided: 16-09-1975 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A. ALAGIRISWAMI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

' 
.... 
) 7 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
NANHOO MAL & ORS. 
'V. 
HlRA MAL & ORS. 
September 16, 1975 
809' 
[A. ALAGIRISWAML, P. K. GOSWAMI AND N. L. UNTWALIA, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 226 and 329-~rit Jurisdi~tion of Iligh· 
Courts-High Court, if could interfere in matters relating to election. 
[J.P. Municipalities Act, Section. 43-B-Notices to 1nembers of 
Municipal' 
Board calling for nomination to the office of President-Validity of procedure 
adopted by District Magistrate, if could be challenged before High Court under 
A.rlicle 226 df the Co~ritution. 
To fill up a casual vacancy in the office of the President <?f ~he Mu~icipal 
Board, Soron in the dfatrict of Etah in Uttar Pradesh, the District Magistrate-: 
issued noticr.s to the members of 1he Board infClrming them that notp.ination. 
papm should be filed in his office by 20th of September, 1974 and if necessary 
the election "".ill take place on 1st October, 1974 .. 'fye 1st respo~dent there~p?n 
filed a petition under Article 226 of the ConsntuUon challen!l'ng tho val1d1ty 
of the procedure adopted by the District Magistrate for holding the election 
and prayed for an order to the District Magistrate not to hold the electioni 
on 1st October. 1974. The objection to the procedure for election was based 
on the allegation that it did not conform to tho provisions of Rule 6 of the 
U.P. hrfunicipalities (CondUJ:t of Election of Presidents and Election Petitions) 
Order, 1964. 
The High Court admitted tho Writ Petition and directed that tho 
election would be subject to ultimate decision in the Writ Petition.. Consequently 
the election took place on the 1st of October and the !st appellant was declared 
elected. Thereafter the 1st respondent filed an application for impleading the 
1st appellant and the Municipal Board as parties and also claimed a further 
relief for quashing the election proceedings that took place on the 1st of 
October, 1974. The High Court allowed the petition and set aside the entire 
.election proceedings relating to the·election·of the 1st appellant as the President. 
of the Municipail Board. 
Allowing the appeal by special leave, 
HE-LD : The· right to vote or stand for election to the office of the President 
of the Municipal Board is a creature of the statute, that is the U.P. Municipalities-
Act and it must be subject to the limitations imposed by it. Therefore the 
election to the office of the President could be challenged only accordiiig to 
the procedure prescribed by that Act and that is by me&ns of an election petition 
presented in _accordallce with the provisions of the Act and in no other way. 
The }\ct provides only for one remedy, that remedy being an election petition 
!o be. pr~sented after the election is over and there is no remedY. provided· at any: 
tntermediate stage. 
[813-E, 814A·B, 8140.Dl 
N, P. Ponnuswa1ni v. 
Returning Officer, Non1akk1Il Constituency & Ors. 
G 
[1952] s.C.R. 218 relied on. 
H 
Des.i Chettiar v. Chinnasami Chettiar A.I.R. 1928 Mad. 1271 and Wolver-
{~mptdn New Water Works Co. v .. Hawkesford 6 C.B. (N.S.) 336 referrect· 
(ii) ~~ese conclu~ions in .Ponnuswami's case were arrived at without taking 
the pn?VIstons of Arucle 329 of the Constitution into account. The provisions~ 
of .Arhcle ~29 are relevant only to the extent that even the remedy under 
Article ~2? ts barred as a r.esuH of th' provisions. .But onoe the legal effect of 
the 11r~Vts}~ns of faw cont.med m Article 329 and m section 43-B of the U.P. 
A-1u.ruc1palibe.s Act 1~ taken i~to account there is ,no room for the High COurts 
to interfere 1n exercise of their powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. 
[814-D.E!J 
810 
SUPREtvlE COURT REPORTS 
[1976] I s.c.R: · 
Quaere·: Can tI!ere be. any extraordinary circumstances in which the High 
A 
-Courts could exercise their power under Articloe 226 of the Constitution 
in 
--:- -t--
relation to elections? [814-E] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 732 of 1975. 
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order ·dated the 
19th March, 1975 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc. Writ 
No. 5935 of 1974. " 
R. K. Garg. S. C. Agarwala, V. J. Francis,T. M. Ansari; for the 
~· 
Appellants. 
· 
· · 
· 
M. C. Bhandare, R. Nagarathnam, S. Bhandare, for Respondent 
No. 1. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
8 
c 
ALAGIRISWAMI, J. To fill up a casual vacancy in the office of the 
Pr~sident of the Municipal Board, Soron in the district of Etah in Urtar 
P

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.