TRIMBAKSA RAMASA VYAWAHARE Vs. HABIB MOHAMAD
LAWS(BOM)-1960-12-11
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on December 23,1960

Trimbaksa Ramasa Vyawahare Appellant
VERSUS
Habib Mohamad Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

PURSHOTTAM V. G. V. PANDIT [REFERRED TO]
BHOJRAJ VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

KOTVAL,J. - (1.)IN this revision application I am concerned with an election dispute arising from the general elections recently held to reconstitute the Buldana Municipal Committee. The dispute is between persons who had stood for election from, ward No. 16 of Buldana town. This ward has two seats, a general seat and a reserved seat. The applicant Trimbaksa and opponents Nos. 4, 5 and 6, Syed Habib, Premchand and Laxman, respectively, were contesting the election from the general seat, whereas applicant No. 2 Janardhan and opponents Nos. 2 and 3, Gopal and Janabai, respectively, were contesting the election from the reserved seat. Opponent No. 1 Habib Mohammad was the petitioner before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldana. Prior to the present election, he was also elected as a member of the municipal committee from the general seat from the old ward No. 12.
(2.)THE election was governed by the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Electoral Rules, as recently amended. According to the election programme, the last date for the receipt of nomination papers was March 31, 1959; the scrutiny of the nomination papers was to take place on April 1, 1959; the last date for the withdrawal of candidates from election was April 7, 1959; allotment of symbols was to take place on April 13, 1959; and the election was to take place on May 6, 1959. The Sub -Divisional Officer was appointed the Supervising Officer by the Collector under Rule 8.
It is not in dispute that Habib Mohammad's nomination was duly accepted by the Supervising Officer. He was also allocated a symbol, namely, a pair of scales rjktq. Thus, according to the petitioner, he was fully accepted as a candidate for the election by the Supervising Officer; had a legal right to go through the poll, and at that stage no one could legally prevent him from being a candidate and submit himself to the vote of the people. It is also not in dispute that as a result of certain other proceedings commenced against Habib Mohammad, he was not considered fit to stand as a candidate for election and his ballot box was, on the date of the election, removed from the polling booth under orders of the Supervising Officer. How this transpired may now be stated.

(3.)SECTIONS 22 -A and 22 -B of the C. P. and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, impose certain special disabilities upon the president, vice -president, and members of a municipal committee. Those sections make stringent provisions for the prompt payment of municipal dues by these persons and prescribe the consequences of non -payment. Section 22 -A requires that within 15 days from the expiration of each quarter, the committee shall prepare a list of all the members and office bearers who were in arrears for six months from the date on which the tax became due and submit it to the Deputy Commissioner. If no notice of demand has been previously served by the committee, the Deputy Commissioner is enjoined to serve a special notice on the defaulter calling upon him to pay the arrears within 30 days from the date of service. If, however, notice has already been issued by the committee, then the disqualification contemplated ensues automatically under Section 22 -B of the Act.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.