The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to vote was not dependent on the entry of names in the voters list, and the election was deemed valid based on this interpretation.

JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is directed against a determination of the question of the validity of an election to the headship of the Madhub temple at Hajo in the District of Kamrup. The high priest is named Daloi and the last incumbent of the office died on the 21st December 1917. This religious endowment is described in the proceedings as ancient and its management is now regulated by a scheme drawn up by this Court on the 1st May 1911 in modification of a scheme prepared by the District Judge on the 9th December 1908 in a suit instituted u/s 539 of the CPC of 1882 for the administration of the trust.

2. This scheme directs that the Daloi be elected as before by the Bardeories of the temple, to hold the office for life unless removed by the Civil Court in a suit instituted for that purpose. There will also be a Committee of five elected members besides the Daloi who will hold office for three years. Three of the members will be elected by the Bardeories and two by the shebaits, the Daloi will be the sixth and will have a casting vote. The scheme further directs that a Commissioner be appointed by the Court to prepare a list of the Bardeories living within 5 miles of Hajo, who will be entitled to vote at the election of a Daloi and of the members of the Committee. There will also be list of the shebaits entitled to vote for the Committee, and the Court will indicate the manner m which such election should be held for future guidance. The Committee will revise the list of the voters once a year, after the publication of notice and will arrange for the election of their successors and of a Daloi when there is a vacancy.

3. In accordance with this scheme, steps were taken for the election of a Daloi and the election was in fact held on the 15th January 1918. The result was that the present appellant received 203 votes and the respondent 48 votes. The validity of the election was consequently challenged by the respondent. The District Judge allowed the objection and cancelled the election. On appeal, this Court reversed the decision of the District Judge and remitted the case for further consideration. The District Judge thereupon upheld the objection that the election had been held m an objectionable manner and again cancelled the election There was a further appeal to this Court which was dismissed on the 10th February 1021 But this Court directed that a list of voters be framed and that a fresh Action be held after the Committee had been reconstituted The election was held on the 19th and 20th February 1922 and we are now called upon to decide whether the election was valid in law.

4. The validity of the election is assailed on the ground that persons whose names were not entered in the list of voters were permitted to participate in the election. This objection has been overruled by the District Judge and has been reiterated here as a matter of principle. On behalf of the appellant the position has been maintained that the Commissioner who held the election was not competent to permit any person to participate in the election whose name had not been previously entered in the electoral roll. We are of opinion that there is no force in this contention. There is nothing in the scheme which ordains that the right to vote is dependent on the entry of the name of the voters in the voters list. Although the scheme states that those Bardeories whose names are entered in the list are entitled to vote, it does not provide, nor does it follow in the absence of an express direction to that effect, that those not so entered cannot vote. There is consequently no infringement of a mandatory rule: Shyam Chand v. Chairman of the Dacca Municipality 53 Ind. Cas. 741 : 47 C. 524 : 30 C.L.J. 70 : 24 C.W.N. 189. This view of the effect of this scheme was incidentally adopted by Mr. Justice Woodroffe and Mr. Justice Smither in an earlier stage of these proceedings. But it has been urged before us that the question was not at that Stage directly and substan