than such offices as are declared by rules made under this Act not to disqualify the holder;"both these Sections are similar and there is no difference and as stated supra, a Division Bench of this Court held that the office of profit in BEML is a bar for contesting elections under Section 11 (1) (j) of the Zilla Parishads Act, which is similar to Section 26 (1) (c) of the KMC Act. Therefore, holding of office of profit in BEML AND ITI which are "other authorities" amounts to holding of office of profit in terms of Section 26 (1) (c) of the impugned Act. So, the petitioners are disqualified to contest the election of Municipal Councillor.

( 38 ) LET us now consider whether the said decision requires reconsideration having regard to the contentions urged by the petitioners. At the outset, it should be noticed that the tests applicable to find out whether an 'organisation' falls within the expression 'other authorities' in Article 12; there is no bar in construing the words 'other authority' in a statute, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of each case, in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court, interpreting the words 'other authority' in Article 12 of the Constitution.

( 39 ) IT is contended that the word 'other authority' under Art. 12 of the Constitution was explained by the Supreme Court in Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal, AIR 1967 SC 1857, as referring to only a Statutory Bodies. At that time, the extended definition including Government Companies expounded in Ajay Hasia's case, AIR 1981 SC 487, was not available. Therefore, the expression 'other authorities' in Section 26 (1) (c) of the impugned Act has to be interpreted keeping in view the Judgment of the Rajasthan State Electricity Board's case and not later judgments and if such interpretation is given, the words 'other authority' in the impugned Section cannot be said to be similar to 'other authority' in Article 12 of the Constitution.

( 40 ) THE Apex Court in Rajasthan State Electricity Board's case, held that the Board is a statutory body. So, it is an 'other authority' in terms of Article 12 of the Constitution and amenable to Judicial review to scrutinise the violation of Fundamental Rights. The judgment of the Supreme Court explaining the meaning of 'other authority' is an illustrative and not exhaustive.

( 41 ) THE Supreme Court dealing with interpretation of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, in K. S. Rama Murthy Reddiar v. The Chief Commissioner, Pondicherry, AIR 1963 SC 1464, has observed as follows :"further, all local or other authorities within the territory of India include all authorities within the territory of India whether under the control of the Government of India or the Governments of various States and even autonomous authorities which may not be under the control of the Government at all. "

( 42 ) THE principles laid down in the above judgment has been referred and approved in Rajasthan State Electricity Board's case (AIR 1967 SC 1857) and held that the Board is an 'authority' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

( 43 ) THUS, the contention of the petitioners that, there was no judgment holding that, other than the statutory body, i. e. , the local or other authorities, the autonomous body are not 'other authorities' is not tenable. The law laid down by the Supreme Court giving wider interpretation to the words 'other authority' was there even before Rajasthan State Electricity Board's case.

( 44 ) THIS point can be viewed in another perspective. The words 'other authorities' apart from Article 12 of the Constitution, is also found in Articles 58 (2) and 66 (4) of the Constitution of India.

( 45 ) ARTICLE 58 of the Constitution deals with qualification for election as President of India. Article 58 (2) provides that :"a person shall not be eligible for election as President if he holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any Stat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document