The State Government has the power to make rules regulating and determining the authority which shall decide disputes arising under any rules made under Sec.19 of the Bihar and Orissa Municipal Act, 1922, and such rules are not invalid on the ground of delegated legislation.

Das, J.

1. This suit originally instituted in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Darbhanga, has been, brought up to this Court by an order of transfer passed by a Division Bench, The suit has been heard by me on two dates. None of the parties have adduced any evidence, but learned counsel for the parties have addressed me on certain questions of law arising out of the pleadings of the parties; therefore, the suit has been a legal battle on pure questions of law.

2. The plaintiff is one Chaturbhuj Prasad, a registered voter in the electoral roll of Ward No. 3 in the Samastipur Municipality within the district of Darbhanga. Fifteen persons, who were notified in the official gazette as having been duly elected as commissioners for the Samastipur Municipality on an election held on the 3rd and 4th of October, 1950, were originally made defendants in the action. Subsequently, the State of Bihar was added as a party defendant.

3. Put briefly, the case of the plaintiff is that the term of office of the present Municipal Board expired in May, 1950, and under the authority given to the Magistrate of the district by the Bihar Municipal Election Rules, 1943, the District Magistrate fixed 26-9-1950, as the date of the general election. No poll was, however, held on that date, and by another notification the District Magistrate fixed or extended, the date of election to 3rd and 4th of October, 1950. On those two dates a poll was taken and the first fifteen defendants were notified in the official gazette on 29-11-1950, as having been duly elected as commissioners of the Samastipur Municipality. The plaintiff pleads that the District Magistrate had no right to extend the date of election from 26-9-1950 to 3rd and 4th of October, 1950; therefore, the election held on the 3rd and 4th of October, 1950, was ab initio void and without jurisdiction. The plaintiff asks for the following main reliefs :

(1) The Court should declare that the first fifteen defendants are not duly elected commissioners of the new Board to be constituted for the Samastipur Municipality.

(2) The Court should further grant a perpetual injunction restraining the fifteen defendants from constituting the new Municipal Board or taking charge from the old Municipal Board or from exercising any power or function as Municipal Commissioners under the Bihar and Orissa Municipal Act.

I may note here, that the learned Subordinate Judge passed an interim order of injunction against these fifteen defendants, and on an appeal from that order, a Division Bench of this Court passed the order for transfer of the suit.

4. Some of the first fifteen defendants have filed a written statement. The State of Bihar has also filed a separate written statement. The main defence which is relevant at this stage is that the suit is barred by reason of Rules 3 and 4, Bihar Municipal Election Petitions Rules, 1941, and that the District Magistrate had the power and authority to fix a fresh date of election or even to extend the date originally fixed. It is stated that the reason for the extension in the present case was that officers who had been deputed to the muffassil to maintain peace in connection with the Bakrid festival could not come back in time to arrange for and take part in the election; therefore, the District Magistrate fixed a revised programme which was duly published in accordance with the Bihar Municipal Election Rules, 1943. Certain allegations of fact made by the plaintiff were denied; but as the contest between the parties has centred round questions of law only, I, do not think that it is necessary to relate them at this Stage.

5. On the aforesaid pleadings the following issues were settled by the learned Subordinate Judge:

1. Is the suit as framed maintainable?

2. Has the plaintiff got any cause of action or right to sue?

3. Is the suit barred under Sec.3, Bihar Municipal Election Petitions Rules,

4. Was the extension of the date for general election from 26th September