Rigby J:

This is an Election Petition presented by one, Cheah Seng Teik, who was a candidate, duly nominated by the Alliance Party, to contest the Butterworth Town Council Elections in respect of the Northern Ward. The election was held on 5 November 1957.

It would appear from the petition that the petitioner and one Mrs. Oon Beng Hong, nominated on behalf of the Province Wellesley Labour Party, were the sole contestants for election in respect of the Northern Ward.

After the Returning Officer had declared that the nominations were closed and that objections to nominations could be lodged within the next half hour, the said Mrs. Oon Beng Hong presented a written objection to the Returning Officer against the petitioner on the ground that he was not able to speak and read and write the English or Malay language with a degree of proficiency sufficient to enable him to take an active part in any proceedings as a Town Councillor - an essential prerequisite for qualification to election as a Town Councillor in accordance with s. 14(b) of the written Constitution of the Butterworth Town Council as provided by Legal Notification No. 112 contained in the Supplement to the Federation of Malaya Government Gazette (Penang Section) data 9 April 1953.

According to the Petition, the Returning Officer "read out the objection and proceeded to test the validity thereof by examining the petitioner searchingly in speaking and reading and writing both English and Malay languages for nearly an hour.

In a subsequent para. in the Petition it is said, however, that after the Returning Officer had tested the petitioner in the English language he requested one Inche Hashim bin Itam to test the petitioner in the Malay language.

However, after these tests had been completed it would appear from the Petition that the Returning Officer then announced that it was not open to Mrs. Oon Beng Hong to object to the petitioner's nomination on language grounds and he accordingly overruled her objection. Pausing here for a moment, the grounds on which objection may be taken to a nomination paper are contained in Reg. 25(1) of the Local Authorities Elections Regulations, 1951 (Gazette (Penang Section) Notification No. 103 dated 16 May 1951), and it is apparent that an objection on language grounds is not one of those grounds. The Returning Officer's ruling was, therefore, perfectly correct.

Regulation 25(3), however, provides:

25 (3) Every objection shall be in writing signed by the objector and shall specify the ground of objection. The Returning Officer may himself lodge an objection not only on any of the grounds set out in para. (1) of this regulation but also on the ground that the candidate is not qualified to be, or not capable of being, elected a Councillor in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.

Having rejected Mrs. Oon Beng Hong's objection it would appear - and I quote from the Petition itself - that the Returning Officer then stated:

He had authority to object on such ground and in consequence thereof he rejected your petitioner's nomination and then declared the said Mrs. Oon Beng Hong returned unopposed as Councillor for Northern Ward for three years.

The petitioner concludes his Petition with a prayer that it may be determined that the said Mrs. Oon Beng Hong was not duly elected or returned and that the election was void.

The petitioner bases his Petition on two grounds, one of law and one of fact. As a matter of law he submits that the whole proceedings were irregular and ultra vires, since although it may have been open to the Returning Officer himself to lodge an objection (which the petitioner does not admit), such objection, in accordance with Reg. 25(3), to which I have referred, should have been in writing signed by the objector, and specifying the grounds of objection.

It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Returning Officer founded his decision on a test which had been concluded on Mr