U.P.SINGH, J. - (1.) AT the very threshold, the common question raised in all these petitions is as to whether in terms of Article 243 -ZG of the Constitution there is complete and absolute bar in considering any matter relating to Municipal election on any ground whatsoever after the publication of the notification for holding Municipal election The provisions contained in Article 243 -ZG may be noticed which reads : - "243 -ZG. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution - (a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of seats to such constituencies, made or pur­porting to be made Article 243 -ZG shall not be 'called in question in any court; (b) no election to any Municipality shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State. Considering the importance of the matter, when the petitions were taken up for hearing, several intervenes, who were interested in the Municipal elections, filed petitions for intervention and they were allowed to intervene and were fully heard in the matter for number of days.
(2.) THESE ten petitioners in this main petition and others in the con­nected writ petitions have questioned the fairness of the action of the autho­rities concerned in publication of the notification dated 10th October, 1995 and 13th October, 1995 contained in Annexures 6 and 7 of the writ petition in pursuance of which they are proceeding to hold and conduct the election of the Municipal Corporations which ara in fact yet to coma into existence in the manner provided by the 74th Amendment of the Constitution. In this main petition the petitioners belong to the districts of Kanpur, Bareiliy, Lucknow, Gorakhpur, Ghaziabad, Agra, Varanasi, Aligarh, Moradabad and Meerut. fn the other connected Writ Petitions they belong to Varanasi and Bhadohi The State Government as also the Election Commission have filed their counter -affidavits and the petitions have been filed by the intervenes. On one hand the respondents are contending that after the publication of the Notification calling the Municipal election Article 243 ZG operates as a complete bar and, therefore, even this court is not competent under Article 226 of the Constitution to entertain these petitions, and on the other hand, the petitioners, who are willing to participate in the ensuing election are crying hoarse and contending that the contemplated so -called election is a complete force and the action ,of the respondents and its Authorities concerned has shaken the confidence of the people at large when the constitutional mandates as provided in Part 9 -A of the Constitution introduced by 74th Amendment has been thrown to winds. Arbitrariness in the action of the then Government is writ large on the fact of the record itself such being the situation, can this provision contained in Article 243 -ZQ treated a* Great Wall China setting up an absolute bar so impregnable that it cannot be by­passed even by Article 226. This is a sense, is the key question that governs the fate of these petitions.
(3.) FOR the working of the electoral machinery and understanding of the powers and duties vested in the functionaries constituting the infra­structure it is essential to sketch the ambit and import of Article 243 in its totality as contained in Part 9 -A of the Constitution. Article 243 -ZG baits the judicial intervention provided the act possesses the pro -requisite of 'election' in its semantic sweep. That is to say, immunity is conferred only if the act impeached is done for the apparent object of furthering a free and fair election and the protective armour drops down if the act challenged is either unrelated to or thwarts of taints the course of the election.;