( 1. ) IN this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks a writ of Certiorari against the order of the Returning Officer (Respondent 1), dated 4-11 1974 (Petitioners Annexure-B) rejecting the petitioners nomination paper for Councillor ship from Ward No. 12 of Kareli Municipality as also the appellate order, dated 7-11-1974 (Petitioners annexure -D) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Narsimhapur, upholding the order of the Returning Officer and dismissing the appeal on the ground that the present petitioner had not complied with rule 13 (2) of the Madhya pradesh Municipalities (Preparation, Revision and Publication of Electoral rolls, Election and Selection of Councillors) Rules, 1962.

( 2. ) THE petitioner and the second respondent, Jaganathsingh and one other candidate, who has not been joined as a party in the present writ petition, but who has filed an Election Petition, were candidates for Councillor ship of Ward No. 12, known as Lal Bahadur Shastri Ward. The second respondents nomination paper was found to be valid. The third candidates nomination paper was rejected in respect of which he has filed an Election Petition, which is pending. The petitioners nomination paper was rejected on the sole ground that in Column No. I instead of describing Ward No. 12 as Lal Bahadur shashtri Ward, he described it as Lal Bahadur Ward No. 12. Column No. 1 of the nomination form is meant for showing the Ward only for which a candidate for election is nominated. However, in Column No. 8, which is meant for showing the candidates electoral number in the voters list along with the name and number of the Ward, the description was correctly given, namely, voters list No. 454, in Lal Bahadur Shashtri Ward No. 12. Similarly, in column Nos. 10 and 13, which are meant for showing the voters list, number of the proposer and the seconder respectively with reference to the name and the number of the Ward, the description given was correct, namely, proposers voters list No. 467, Lal Bahadur Shashtri Ward No. 12 and seconders voters list No. 333 in Lal Bahadur Shashtri Ward No. 12. Thus the only mistake committed by the petitioner was that in Column No. 1 of the form he gave the correct number of the Ward, but did n it give the correct description of the ward and merely mentioned Lal Bahadur Ward No. 12, instead of Lal Bahadur shashtri Ward No. 12. That was the only ground on which the petitioners nomination paper was rejected.

( 3. ) AGAINST the rejection of his nomination paper, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer under rule 13 (2) of the M. P. Municipalities (Preparation, Revision and Publication of Electoral Rolls, Election and Selection of Councillors) Rules, 1962. The Sub-Divisional Officer rejected the appeal on the ground that there was no compliance of rule 13 (2), which is as follows:

"r. 13 (2 ). An appeal shall lie against the order of the supervising officer declaring nomination paper invalid:- (i) to the Collector if the Supervising Officer is the Sub-Divisional Officer or the deputy Collector; or (ii) to the Sub-Divisional Officer if the supervising officer is the Tahsildar. Such appeals shall not lie unless notice is given by the affected candidate or his seconder to the supervising officer expressing an intention to file an appeal, as soon as the order rejecting nomination is passed by him and they are lodged in the office of his appellate authority before 3 P. M. on the day next but one following the last day fixed for the scrutiny of the nomination papers. The appellate authority shall take up all such appeals in the order in which they have been filed, commencing at 12 noon on the day following the last day on which they may be presented. The appellate authority shall not be required to issue any notice but all candidates and their proposers and seconders shall be entitled to be present and every candidate shall be entitled to be heard in connection with any