Art.243-ZG of the Constitution bars interference by courts in election matters and provides that the appropriate remedy for any aggrieved person is to challenge the election by way of an election petition.

K.A. Swami, CJ.

1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 19.09.1996 passed by the learned single Judge, dismissing W.P.No.13640 of 1996.

2. In the writ petition, the petitioner sought for quashing the proceedings of the Commissioner/Election Officer of the 4th respondent dated 29.08.1996. By the impugned proceedings, the State Election Officer has allotted seats for women in Puliyangudi Municipality.

3. The agrievance made is that the allotment of seats for women is not in conformity with the Tamil Nadu Town Panchayeats, Municipalities and Corporations (De-limitation of Wards or Divisions and Reservation) Rules, 1996 as the allotment offends the provisions which provides for allotment of seats to Scheduled Caste and Schedule Caste women according to the population ratio.

4. Learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that Art.243 -ZG is a bar for going into the question urged in the writ petition and the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file an election petition and make it a ground for challenging the election.

5. Art.243-ZG has been specifically enacted into the Constitution for taking away the jurisdiction of the courts, even of the High Court under Art.226, to interfere with the election process. The said Article specifically provides thus:-

"243 ZG Bar to intreference by Courts in election matters:-Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution.-

.(a) the Validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of seats to such constituencies, made or purporting to be made under Art.243-ZA shall not be called in question in any Court.

.(b) no election to any Municipality shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State."

From the aforesaid provisions contained in Art.243-ZG it is clear that allotment of seats to constituencies cannot also be challenged in a petition under Art.226 of the Constitution and the appropriate remedy for any aggrieved person is to challenge the election by way of an election petition, as stated in Clause (b) of Art.243-ZG of the Constitution.

6. Section 51-B of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act provides for the grounds for declaring the election to be void in an election petition field before the District Judge under Section 51-A of the said Act. Clause (d) (iv) of sub-Section (1) of Sec- 51-A of the Act specifically provides that if the result of the election, in so far as it concerns a returned candidate, has been materially effected by non-compliance with the provisions of the Act or of any rules on orders made thereunder, the District Judge shall declare the election of the returned candidates to be void.

7. The contention is that improper allotment of seats cannot be raised in an election petition.

8. We find it very difficult to accept this contention. Section 51-B of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920, does not make any such distinction. Therefore, we are of the view that in the light of the bar contained under Art.243-ZG of the Constitution, the proper remedy for the petitioner is to file an election petition. We, accordingly, keep open all the contentions and also set aside all the findings, if any recorded, or the observations, if any, made by the learned single judge and dismiss the writ petition on the ground that it is not maintainable. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.