The validity of electoral rolls for municipal elections is not affected if they are not revised every year, and fresh nominations can be invited for fresh elections ordered by the High Court.

1. The petitioners in this writ petition challenge the validity of election of respondents 5 and 6 to Municipal Committee, Kharar District Ropar, (hereinafter called the Committee), from Wards Nos.8 and 10 of the town. It is claimed by them that they were enrolled as voters from these wards and are aggrieved by the failure of respondents 1 to 4 to prepare fresh electoral rolls in the year 1969 when the elections were held inasmuch as several persons eligible to vote in the two constituencies were denied their right to vote whereas others not qualified to be enrolled voted in the elections from these two wards.

2. In the course of arguments, Mr. C. L. Lakhanpal, learned counsel for the petitioners, stated that he did not want to press the petition against Mohan Lal respondent who had been elected from Ward No.10. The Deputy Commissioner Ropar, respondent No.3, in his affidavit by way of reply to the writ petition, has stated that the names of the petitioners are not entered in electoral rolls of Wards Nos.8 and 10 and that the averment of the petitioners to this effect is obviously false. In order to appreciate the contentions raised by Shri Lakhanpal, it is necessary to state a few facts.

3. Elections to the Committee were held in the year 1967 and nomination papers of Karam Singh respondent and one Bachan Singh were rejected by the Returning Officer. They instituted two writ petitions Nos.2010 and 2011 of 1967 respectively, in this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. These petitions were dismissed by a learned Single Judge on 13th March, 1968. A Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of the Single Judge was allowed on 30th January, 1969, it having been held that the orders rejecting the nomination papers of the petitioners in those two cases were manifestly illegal and without jurisdiction. While allowing the writ petitions, the Letters Patent Bench issued a direction that fresh elections to the Committee from Wards Nos.8 and 10 be held in accordance with law. It was in these circumstances that the impugned elections were held.

4. The following two points have been urged before me on behalf of the petitioners: (1) That it was incumbent on the respondents to have got prepared a fresh electoral roll and elections could not be held on the basis of that prepared in 1967, and (2) That the Deputy Commissioner, respondent 3, committed an error of jurisdiction in inviting nomination papers of candidates other than those who had earlier filed their nominations in the year 1967.

5. In my opinion, both the contentions are without any basis and must be rejected. The Committee is constituted under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (hereinafter called the Act) and elections thereto are regulated by the Municipal Election Rules, 1952 (hereinafter called the Rules ). A right to vote is not a fundamental right and is the creation of a statute. According to the Rules, only that person is entitled to vote whose name is included in the electoral roll for the Legislative Assembly of the State of Punjab in relation to the constituency concerned, and as a matter of fact the roll of a constituency of a municipality is the electoral roll of Punjab Legislative Assembly in relation to the said constituency as may be operative on the date fixed by the Deputy Commissioner under Rule 10 for the submission of nomination papers. The State Government can, of course, under Rule 8, direct that an electoral roll for an Assembly shall not be used in any election and that fresh roll shall be prepared in the manner specified in Rules 8-A to 8-K which provide a procedure for the preparation of an electoral roll. In the preparation of fresh preliminary electoral rolls for municipal elections there is, of course, nothing to revert the competent authorities from using the current electoral rolls for the Assembly constituencies. In the instance case, the validity of electoral rolls as prepared in the year 1967 is not challenged and i