The State Election Commission has the power to revise the allotment of symbols under Rule 20(6) of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Election) Rules, 1994, if it is inconsistent with any direction issued by the Commission.

P. K. PALLI, J.

( 1 ) VIDE the notification dated 2910-1994 the Government of Rajasthan has called upon the electorate to elect the members of the Municipalities and the election is scheduled to be held on 27-11-1994.

( 2 ) ALL the petitioners are candidates for the Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur and a public notice of the indended election came to be issued on 10-11-1994. The last date for filing nominations was fixed as 14-11-1994 and for the purpose of withdrawal of the nomination papers the date was specified as 17-11-1994.

( 3 ) ON 18-11-1994 the symbols were allotted by the Returning Officer to the candidates including the petitioners as per their choice indicated. By a communication the candidates including the petitioners were informed in respect of the symbols allotted to them.

( 4 ) IT is said that the petitioners immediately thereafter rushed for getting the election material printed and the election campaign was undertaken by them and insertions in the newspapers in this respect were also given out.

( 5 ) ). On 20-11-1994, according to the petitioners, in the early hours of the morning a communication was handed over to each one of them whereby they were intimated about the change in the allotment of symbols. This communication has been placed as Annx. 1 and is dated 19-11-1994. This action appears to have been taken under the provisions of Rule 20 sub-rule (6) of the Rajasthan Municipal (Election) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ). This communication is addressed to each of the petitioners by the Returning Officer (Additional District Magistrate, Jodhpur ). A reading of this communication makes out that it was the State Election Commission that desired a revision in the allotment of symbols through a wireless message dated 19-11-1994. Although this wireless message has not been annexed to the writ petition but on my asking the same has been made available by the respondents and it is placed on the record as Annex. C-1. In the message the Chief Electoral Officer and secretary informs the Returning Officer, Jodhpur that the allotments made by him are not included in the list of free symbols notified by the State Commission on 3-10-1994. The same was incorrect and the Commission directs under sub-rule (6) of Rule 20 of the Rules to revise the allotment in accordance with the notification of the Commission issued earlier. It, thus, becomes clear that it was in pursuance of this communication and under the provisions mentioned therein that the necessary follow up action was taken resulting in the revision of symbols vide Annex. 1.

( 6 ) THE petitioners for facility of reference have placed the relevant rules as Annex. 3. It is next stated in the petition that the entire process of election should be put to a halt by making suitable directions that the elections be not held till appropriate amendments are made. The petitioners are further aggrieved in respect of the amendments, which have been made in delimination of the wards and preparation of electoral rolls. A chaos is stated to have been created in the process of holding free and fair election and finally it has been said that the respondents are not within their power to change the allotment of symbols, once the allotment has been made on 18-11-1994.

( 7 ) THE petitioners are thus stated to have changed their position on account of the representation made to them by giving them the option to choose the symbols from out of the list shown to them by the Returning Officer and the respondents cannot now turn round to say that the allotment made to the petitioners was wrong and they are allotted different symbols.

( 8 ) A mention may also be made to the additional affidavit which the petitioners have placed on record wherein the details of the electoral rolls for each of the ward as not having been prepared as stipulated by Rule 20 (1) of the Conduct of Election Rules has been given. A mention is also made in the said affidavit about th