The interpretation of Section 14(j) of the Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1952, requires payment of all taxes due up to the end of the preceding financial year, with the latest permissible payment date being before the filing of the nomination paper.

Raj Kishore Prasad, J.

1. The petitioner has moved this Court, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, and asked for a writ in the nature of certiorari to call up and quash the decision of the District Judge, Patna, opposite party no 1, passed under Sec. 544, Clause (2), of the Patna Municipal Corporation Act. 1951 (Bihar Act XIII of 1952), hereinafter referred to as "the Act". He has also prayed to quash the election of opposite party no. 2 as a councillor, elected by ward No. 24, of the Patna Municipal Corporation, under Section 8(1) (b) of the Act.

2. The Patna Municipal Corporation Act came into force on the 15th August, 1952. The State Government, under Sec. 540 of the Act, framed rules, for election of councillors, which were published in the Gazette on the 28th July, 1953. These rules were called the Patna Municipal Corporation Preparation of Electoral Bolls and Conduct of Elections Rules, 1953, hereinafter referred to as "the Rules". Under Rule 2, Clause (n). the District Magistrate, Patna, was appointed the returning officer.

The Government of Bihar notified; on the 31st October, 1953, that the election of the councillors, by the different Wards, of the Patna Municipal Corporation, as required by Section 8(1)(b), of the Act, would take place on the 14th January 1954, and, fixed the last date for making nominations to be the 18th December 1953. On the 18th December, 1953, however, the date of election was extended by the Government to the 24th March, 1954, and, the date for making the nominations was also extended to the 4th March, 1954. On the 4th March, 1954, the petitioner and opposite party No. 2 filed their nomination papers, from ward No. 24. The scrutiny of the nomination papers of these two candidates was taken up on the 4th March, 1954, when the petitioner made objections to the nomination of opposite party no, 2, on the ground that he had not paid the corporation tax due from him in respect of his various holdings and, therefore, he was not eligible for election in view of the provisions of Clause (J) of Sec.14 of the Act. The returning officer, however, on the 5tn March, 1954. disallowed the objection of the petitioner, on a report from the Patna Municipal Corporation that all dues had been paid by opposite party No. 2 -in respect of his holdings.

3. The polling for ward No. 24, thereafter, took place on the 24th March, 1954, at three polling stations, including Sadargali Urdu U. P. School. Opposite party No. 2 having secured the large number of votes was declared by the returning officer under Rule 69(a) of the Rules. The election was published in the Bihar Gazette, as required by Sec.15 of the Act, on the 5th January, 1955.

4. The petitioner on the 9th April, 1954, filed an election petition under Section 544(1) of the Act, but, subsequently, he withdrew it on the 6th May, 1954. The present election petition was filed on the 18th January, 1955, after the notification under Sec.15 of the Act.

5. The petitioner questioned the election of opposite party No. 2 on various grounds in his election petition. The learned District Judge, who lathe authority authorised under Sec. 544(1) of the Act to hear such election petitions, after hearing the parties and considering the evidence of both sides, dismissed the election petition of the petitioner by an order dated the 12th August, 1955.

6. Such an order of the District Judge has been declared "conclusive" under Section 544(3) of the Act. The petitioner, therefore, moved this Court under Articles 226 and 227 on a previous occasion also, but it was dismissed on the 2nd September, 1955. on account of certain defects. The petitioner, therefore, presented the present application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, on the 20th September, 1955, for quashing the impugned order of the District Judge, Patna, and the election of opposite party No. 2.

7. Before this Court, Mr. Basudeo Prasad, appearing for the petitioner, has taken only two