Mootham, C.J. - (1.) THIS is a petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 were candidates for election to the office of Chairman of a Town Area Committee. The election was held on 1610 -1957 and on the following day the second Respondent was declared duly elected. The Petitioner then filed an election petition in which he challenged the validity of the second Respondent's election on a number of grounds. That petition was however dismissed by the Election Tribunal by an order dated 11 -9 -1958, upon the ground that it had not been presented in accordance with law because, first, it had not been presented by the Petitioner in person and secondly, it was not accompanied by a deposit of Rs. 200 as security as required by the rules. The Petitioner then filed the petition which is now before us in which he questions the correctness of the decision of the Tribunal and prays that its order be quashed by a writ of certiorari, Sub -section (4A) of 8A of the U.P. Town Areas Act, 1914, provides that No election of the Chairman shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as may be provided for by or under this Act.
(3.) THE relevant rules under the Act are 47 and 50 which, so far as they are relevant, read thus: 47.(1) An election petition may be presented by any candidate whose name has been entered in a list Under -rule 12 of the U.P. Town Areas (Conduct of Election of Chairman) Rules, 1953, or whose nomination has been rejected u/R 11 of the aforesaid Rules read with para 22 of the U.P. Town Areas Conduct of Election of Members; Order, 1953. Election petitions will be presented by only those persons who were candidates for an election against which election petition is filed. 50. An election petition will be presented together with a deposit of Rs. 200 as security for costs to the Munsif within whose territorial jurisdiction the Town Area is situated within thirty days from the date on which the election was held; it shall specify the ground or grounds on which the election is questioned and shall contain a summary of the circumstances alleged to justify the election being questioned on such ground or grounds. The facts relating to the presentation of the election petition in the present case are not in dispute. The petition was presented within the prescribed time to the appropriate Munsif by a pleader duly authorised in this behalf by the Petitioner. The petition was accompanied by an application by the Petitioner that he be allowed to deposit Rs. 200 as security with the Central Nazir. That application was allowed by the Munsif and the money was in fact deposited with the Central Nazir on the same day as that on which the petition was presented.;