Back
1957 Supreme(P&H) 96
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Bishan Narain, J.
Shiam Sunder
Versus
State Of Punjab
Civil Writ No. 607 of 1956,
Decided On : AUGUST 28, 1957
The absence of valid delimitation of constituencies renders an election invalid.
Headnote:
ELECTION - MUNICIPAL - DELIMITATION OF CONSTITUENCIES - NECESSITY - ABSENCE OF VALID DELIMITATION - EFFECT ON ELECTION - WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO - ISSUANCE.
Fact of the Case:
Elections were held for the Barnala municipality in September 1956. The petitioners, two residents and registered voters of the town, challenged the validity of the election, alleging various illegalities and irregularities. The main contention was that the election was void due to the absence of valid delimitation of constituencies.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the delimitation of constituencies in the 1952 elections had become obsolete when the boundaries of the municipality were extended in 1953. No new delimitation was carried out before the 1956 elections, resulting in a significant portion of the inhabitants being disenfranchised. The court held that this was a serious irregularity that rendered the entire election invalid.
Issues: 1. Whether the absence of valid delimitation of constituencies invalidated the election. 2. Whether the petitioners had an alternative remedy by way of an election petition or objection under the election rules.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Delimitation of constituencies is a delicate and complicated matter that can seriously affect the results of an election. It is a legal requirement that constituencies be properly delimited before an election is held. 2. The petitioners' objection to the absence of valid delimitation fell outside the scope of the statutory remedies provided under the election rules and an election petition. Therefore, they were not barred from seeking a writ of quo warranto.
Final Decision: The court declared the election to be void and ordered that the ten elected members be restrained from discharging any of the functions, rights, and duties of a member of the Barnala Municipality.
Bishan Narain, J.
1. The Barnala town in the District of Sangrur is a second class municipality. Elections were held for this municipality in September 1956. Two of the residents of the town who are also registered as voters in the rolls of this municipality have filed this petition under Art, 226 of the Constitution for a writ, direction or order in the nature of quo warranto challenging the right of the respondents who were elected as members of the municipality in this election to act as such. The petitioners pray that the office of the members of the municipality may be declared to be vacant and the respondents be restrained from discharging any of the functions, rights and duties of members of the municipality.
This petition is based on the allegation that the election was void and invalid and was vitiated by various illegalities and irregularities. The petitioners have impleaded as respondents the State of Punjab, tho Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, and ten members who were elected in the impugned election. A reply has been filed on behalf of the Punjab State pleading that the election proceedings were legal and regular and that this Court should not interfere as the petitioners have not taken advantage of the alternative and effective remedy available to them under the election rules by means of an election petition.
2. The facts leading to this petition are these. The State Government (the erstwhile Pepsu Government) issued a notification under Section 240(1) (b) and (c) of the Punjab Municipal Act, as then in force in the Pepsu State, dividing tills municipality into 9 election wards and the boundary of each ward was described in the schedule appended thereto.
It was further laid down in this notification that one member shall be elected from each ward excepting ward No. 3 from where two members were to be elected. Elections were then held in this town in 1952. In 1953 the State Government included certain specified areas from outside within the Barnala Municipality by issue of a notification under Section 5(3) of the Municipal Act. This notification was issued on 30-7-1953. This additional and extended area is on all sides of the town and it admittedly appreciably increased the area and the number of inhabitants of this municipal town.
It appears that later on the municipality was superseded and an administrator was appointed to carry on the functions of the municipality. In 1956 the Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, fixed September 1956 for holding general elections for this municipality under Rule 3 of the Pepsu Municipal Election Rules, 1949 , made tinder Section 240 of the Municipal Act. He further appointed the Sub-Divisional Officer, Barnala, as the Deputy Commissioner under Rule 44 of these Election Rules to perform the functions of the Deputy Commissioner for the purposes of the election.
It appears that the Administrator of the Municipality was directed to prepare the preliminary electoral roll. The Administrator by his letter dated 11-7-1956 pointed out to the Sub-Divisional Officer that (1) as he was not the Election Officer he could not prepare the electoral roll, and (2) that as the population etc. in this municipal town had increased since the 1952 elections, it was necessary to divide the town afresh into wards, so that the electoral roll might be prepared. The Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, then by letter dated 13-7-1956, laid down that the wards for the elections would be as were in 1952 elections.
The Sub-Divisional Officer on his part informed the Administrator that he (the Sub-Divisional Officer) had been appointed the Section Commissioner by the Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, under a circular issued by the Pepsu Government on 26-6-1953 authorising the Deputy Commissioner to appoint any other officer as an Election Commissioner. By the same communication the Sub-Divisional Officer issued directions to the Administrator which read- "It is therefore requested that wardwise alphabetical el
