The key legal principle established was that the Distribution Memo under the Civil Courts Act mandated the institution of the election petition in the Court of the District Judge, overriding other provisions.

( 1 ) BY this petition under Order 47, Rule 1, CPC, the petitioner seeks review of the order passed by this Court.

( 2 ) SHRI Jain has basically raised two submissions which are as under :- (A) That case of non-applicant, election petitioner, before the Court below was never that the applicant is not a 'sikh Harijan', therefore, this Court was not justified in taking into account that aspect of the matter and erred in setting aside the election. (B) That under Section 20 sub-section (2), an election petition, under the provisions of M. P. Municipalities Act, 1961, ought to have been filed in the Court of Addl. District Judge, Khurai and its presentation in the Court of District Judge, Sagar was bad and petition itself was not maintainable.

( 3 ) IT does not appear from the judgment delivered by this Court that this objection was raised at the time of final hearing. The parties concentrated on one aspect of the matter. It was argued by both the sides that a particular notification issued by the State Government deletes entry referring to 'sikh Harijan' from a particular date or the subsequent notification issued by the State Government simply refers to an earlier notification under which the earlier entry was deleted. At this stage, it would be too late to say that the question raised before this Court and answered was not a question raised before the lower Court. Not only parties, but even the lower Court decided the matter on the strength of those notifications.

( 4 ) I do not find any force in first contention. It is rejected.

( 5 ) REFERRING to Section 3 sub-section (2) of Civil Courts Act, Shri Jain submits that as the Court of the Addl. District Judge is an independent entity and identity and where the jurisdiction is given independently to the Addl. District Judge, presentation of a case in the Court of District Judge, which was required to be presented before the Addl. District Judge, would be without jurisdiction and bad.

( 6 ) THE arguments raised is sought to be buttressed with support of the judgment of this Court in the matter of M/s. Badrilal Jodhraj and Sons, Indore v. Girdharilal, AIR 1988 MP 24. The facts of the cited case were that against an order passed by the Addl. District Judge in his original jurisdiction a revision was filed before the District Judge. The High Court referring to Section 3 sub-section (2) came to the conclusion that the Addl. District Judge is not a subordinate Court to the Court of District Judge. The said judgment has no application to the facts of the case.

( 7 ) WHILE reading Section 3 sub-section (2), one cannot lose sight of sub-section (2) of Section 7 of Civil Courts Act. According to sub-section (2) of Section 7, an Additional Judge shall discharge any of the functions of a District Judge, including the functions of Principal Civil Court of original jurisdicition which the District Judge may, by general or special order, assign to him and in the discharge of such functions he shall exercise the same powers as the District Judge.

( 8 ) IT is not in dispute before me that in the Distribution Memo made by the learned District Judge, he clearly stated that the election petitions under M. P. Municipalities Act are required to be submitted to his Court. It cannot be disputed that the Distribution Memo has force of law. If the, Distribution Memo samples a litigant to institute proceedings in a particular Court that too under an order which hasthe force of law, then it cannot be expected from such a party that contrary to the provisions of law, relying upon certain other legal provisions, he would ignore the mandatory provisions of Civil Courts Act and would institute original civil proceedings in a Court which otherwise has the jurisdiction, but does not havethe jurisdiction because of the Distribution Memo. A litigant was forbidden from instituting his election petition before the Addl. District Judge, Khurai. Section 20 sub-section (2) of Municiplaities Act, 1961 does c