Power of Courts for interference with electoral proess.

This petition relates to the Municipal Council, Guntur and is taken out by twelve persons stated to be the members of that municipality for calling for the records and for quashing the notification issued by the Government in G.O. No. 1298, Local Administration, dated 1st July, 1952. In 1949 the strength of the Municipal Council, Guntur, was fixed at 32 and as the census of 1951 disclosed an increase in the population, the strength of the council had to be increased to 36 in view of the provisions of section 7 of the District Municipalities Act. This necessitated re-division of the wards into 32. Under section 43 of the District Municipalities Act, the Government have to consult the municipalities concerned before dividing the municipality into wards and doing other things mentioned in that section. Accordingly the Government called for proposals from the municipality with regard to the division of it into wards and also the wards in which seats if any should be reserved under sub-section 3 of section 7 of the Act. On receipt of this communication the Municipal Council passed a resolution on 1st November, 1951, appointing a sub-committee of eight of whom two of the present petitioners were members for formulating proposals to be submitted to the Government regarding division into wards. In order to consider the recommendations of the subcommittee, a meeting of the Council was called for on 7th March, 1952 and the agenda specifically included the consideration of the proposals of the sub-committee with regard to division of wards. But as there was no quorum, the meeting had to be adjourned, By a notice dated 13th March, 1952, the meeting was fixed for 27th March, 1952. On that day a point of order was raised that the meeting was not validly summoned as the notice for the meeting and the agenda were not signed by the Vice-Chairman, the basis of the objection being that the Vice-Chairman left the town on the 16th evening and so he could not have signed either the notice or the agenda. But this point of order was ruled out by the Vice-Chairman who was then presiding on the ground that, the notice and the agenda were signed on the 13th and there was absolutely no force in the point of order. Thereafter the proposals of the sub-committee were considered and were accepted with slight modification and they were communicated to the Government. On 30th May, 1952, some members of the Municipal Council sent a requisition for summoning a special meeting for the purpose of reconsidering the resolution of the 27th of March, 1952. Accordingly the special meeting was summoned and at that meeting it was resolved that the resolution of the 27th March, 1952, should be reconsidered. The meeting was adjourned to 20th June, 1952 and on account of some inconvenience to some of the members, the meeting could not be held on the 20th and it was postponed to 23rd June, 1952. On 23rd June, 1952, at about 11 o’clock when the council was in meeting, a notice was served on the Vice-Chairman by an advocate informing him that a suit was filed by one of the Municipal Councillors.for an injunction restraining the Municipal Council from reconsidering the resolution passed on 27th March, 1952. Immediately the Vice-Chairman read out the notice received by him and adjourned the meeting entering in the minute book that the matter of reconsideration of the resolution was sub judice and left the meeting. It is alleged in the affidavit in support of the petition for the issue of writ of certiorari that 17 members of the Council stayed behind, elected one of them as the president of the meeting and passed a resolution making certain proposals to be forwarded to the Government for the division of the wards. This seems to have been communicated to the Government and it is stated that these proposals were before the Government before the notification now sought to be quashed was issued.

The main grounds of attack against the notification in question are that it is bas