THIRUMALA CHETTIAR Vs. CHELLAM PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for a Writ of Certiorari to vacate the order of the District Munsif of Ambasamudram as Election Commissioner in O.P. No. 72 of 1932 on his file. The order declared the election of the Petitioner void and directed a re- election.

(2.) We have heard some argument as to whether a Writ of Certiorari lies against the order of an Election Commissioner. Mr. T. M. Krishnaswami Aiyar has scarcely contested that on all ordinary principles such a Writ would lie, the test of course being whether the officer against whose proceeding it is directed was acting in a judicial capacity. A construction of that phrase which we think we may adopt here has been given by Scrutton, L.J. in Rex V/s. The London County Council (1931) 2 K.B. 215, where he says: It is enough if the tribunal in question is exercising, after hearing evidence, judicial functions in the sense that it has to decide on evidence between a proposal and an opposition.

(3.) In the present case it is clear that the tribunal was exercising functions of a judicial character and indeed by Rule 6 of the Local Board Rules for the decision of disputes it is provided that every election petition shall be enquired into as nearly as may be in accordance with the procedure applicable under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to the trial of suits. The only case decided on this point is a decision of Bardswell, J. in Shanmuga Mudaliar V/s. Subbaraya Mudaliar . But the learned Judge was not there called upon to discuss whether a Writ-would lie.