Elections cannot be validly held in a municipality without reconstitution of wards post-expansion, violating representation rights.

1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction, order or writ for quashing and setting aside the election of the Councillors to the Municipality for the municipal district of Petlad held on 9th July 1962 and directing respondents Nos. 1 and 2, namely, the State and the Collector to reconstitute the wards comprising the whole of the extended limits of the municipal district of Petlad and for a writ of quo warranto or a writ in the nature of quo warranto calling upon respondents Nos. 5 to 32 who are purported to be elected as Councillers at the election to state by what authority each of them claims to hold the office of a Councillor and restraining them from acting as such Councillors. The question arising in the petition is one of some importance, but it does not admit of much doubt or debate and is relatively simple and easy of solution. But before we proceed to state the question and deal with it, it is necessary to mention briefly a few facts giving rise to the petition.

2. Prior to the extension of its limits on 11th October 1960 the municipal district of Petlad consisted of various Survey Numbers in the town of Petlad which were constituted into a Municipal district by the State Government under S. 4 (1) of the Bombay District Municipal Act, 1901 . By a Resolution dated 4th August 1953, the State Government in exercise of its powers under S. 11, sub-section (1), Cls. (a) and (c) determined the number of Councillors for the Municipality of this municipal district to be 28 and made rules prescribing the number and extent of the wards to be constituted in this municipal district, the number of Councillors to be elected by each ward and the number of seats to be reserved in each ward for the representation of women and scheduled castes. Under the Rules so made, the whole of the then existing municipal district was divided into seven wards and the number of Councillors to be elected by each of these wards was specified so as to make up a total of 28 Councillors for the entire municipal district. The last quadrennial election to the municipality in accordance with these rules was held sometime in 1958 and the term of office of the Councillors elected at this election was due to expire on 9th March 1962. In the meantime on 11th October 1960 a notification was issued by the State Government under S. 4 (1) extending the limits of the municipal district of Petlad by adding certain survey numbers specified in Schedule A to the notification. The result was that the area comprised in these additional survey numbers became part of the municipal district of Petlad. Now unless these newly added area was constituted into one or more wards or was included in any existing ward or wards, no one resident in the newly added area could have a right to vote or to stand as a candidate at an election to the Municipality for the municipal district of Petlad and no such election could validly take place under the Act. The Municipality who is the fourth respondent before us, therefore, repeatedly requested the State Government to reconstitute the wards so as to cover the newly added area, since the term of office of the existing Councillors was due to expire on 9th March 1962 and it would be necessary to hold an election to elect new Councillors. The State Government, however, did not take any steps to reconstitute the wards and pending consideration of the question of reconstitution of the wards, the Commissioner, by a notification dated 27th July 1962 extended the term of office of the existing Councillors upto 30th June 1962.