K. S. SIDHU, J. - (1.) THE Panchayat Elections in Rajasthan were held in December, 1981. Shyam Lal, petitioner herein, was elected as Sarpanch of the Panchayat Bhungra in that election. THE headquarter of the Bhungra Panchayat is situated in village Bhungra, Tehsil Mandawar, Sub Division Tijara. Shiv Lal, respondent 2 herein, presented an election petition under rule 78 of the Rajasthan Panchayat & Nyaya Panchayat (Election) Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1960) before the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh Bas, challenging the validity of the election of the petitioner herein as Sarpanch. THE petitioner contested the election petition and raised an objection to the local jurisdiction of the Munsif, Kishangarh Bas Tehsil, pleading that the local jurisdiction to entertain the election petition is vested in the Munsif, who has been assigned the civil business of Mundawar Tehsil. THE Munsif, Kishangarh Bas Tehsil who is seized of the election petition passed an order, dated, October, 1982, overruling the said objection. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a declaration to the effect that Munsif Kishangarh Bas Tehsil, does not have local jurisdiction in the matter and that such jurisdiction vests in the Additional Munsif, who has been assigned civil business relating to Mundawar Tehsil.
(2.) AFTER hearing Mr. P. C. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. I am of opinion that the Munsif, Kishangarh Bas Tehsil, who is at present seized of the election petition, has local jurisdiction in the matter and that therefore this writ petition has no merit. The reasons for this opinion may be stated as follows. Section 7, Rajasthan Civil Courts Ordinance, 1950 (hereinafter called the Ordinance), which is the main plank of Mr. Jain's argument may be reproduced here for ready reference: "7. Power to fix and after local limits of the jurisdiction of courts. (1) The State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette fix and alter the local limits of the jurisdiction of any Civil Court under this Ordinance. (2) If the same local jurisdiction is assigned to two or more Civil Judges or two or more Munsifs the District Judge may assign to each of them, such civil business cognizable by the Civil Judge or Munsiff, as the case may be, as, subject to any general or special orders of the High Court, he thinks fit. (3) When civil business arising in any local area is assigned by the District Judge under sub-section (2) to one or two or more Civil Judges or to one or two or more Munsiffs, a Munsiff shall not be invalid by reason only of the case in which it was made having arisen wholly or in part in a place beyond the local area if that place is within the local limits fixed by the State Government under sub-section (1 ). (4) A Judge of a Court of Small Causes appointed to be also a Civil Judge within the meaning of this section. (5) The present local limits of the jurisdiction of every Civil Court functioning at the commencement of this Ordinance shall be deemed to have been fixed under this Ordinance". It will be seen that the power to fix the local limits of the jurisdiction of a subordinate Civil Court in the State of Raj. vests in the State Government alone. The State Government can fix the local limits of the jurisdiction of any Civil Court by publishing a notification in the Official Gazette. It may happen, as it happens quite often, that there are two or more than two Munsiffs or Civil Judges within the same local jurisdiction, sub-section (2) which deals with such a situation lays down that if there are two or more than two Civil Judges, or Munsiffs assigned to the same local jurisdiction, it will be for the District Judge to distribute civil business among them and he may bring about such distribution by assigning work case-wise or area-wise. He may distribute work by passing special orders from case to case or else he may pass a general order defining the area within the Sub-division from which a particular Munsif may entertain civil business directly without any special order of assignment by District Judge. It is common ground between the parties that there are three Munsiffs within the local jurisdiction of the Sub-division Tijara. This Sub-division has three Tehsils i. e. Kishangarhbas, Mundawar and Tijara itself. The District Judge has passed a general order (Annexure-4) putting one Munsif in charge of the civil business of each Tehsil. A general order of this nature passed by a District Judge cannot possibly shrink the extent of local jurisdiction of a Munsif as may be conferred on him by the State Government under the Ordinance. The local limits of the jurisdiction of each of the three Munsifs in the Tijara Sub-Division extends throughout the Sub-division of Tijara. The District Judge is not competent to restrict or delimit the local limits of their jurisdiction. Ofcourse, he may assign to each of them such civil business as he finds necessary for administrative reasons. Each of them will in that case be expected to comply with the order of the District Judge. If however a case pertaining to an area within the Sub-Division, but beyond the area assigned to a particular Munsif, is entertained by the said Munsif, he may be a answerable to the District Judge for such deviation from the normal pattern of division of work, but he would not be committing any illegality for, after all, his local jurisdiction extends throughout the Sub - Division of Tijara. Section 7 (3) of the Ordinance reproduced above confirms the correctness of this conclusion. Rule 78 of the Rules of 1960, in so far as it is material for our present purpose, reads as under : "rule 78 - Manner of challenging an election or co-option under Rules.- The election of co-option if any person as the Panch of a Panchayat or the election of any person as the Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch of a Panchayat may be called in question by presenting a petition to the Munsif, or, where there is no Munsiff, to the Civil Judge, within whose jurisdiction the place or Headquarters of the Panchayat or the Nyaya Panchayat, as the case may be, is situated, within thirty days from the date on which the result of such election or co-option is declared, on any one or more of the following grounds. . . . . " It will be seen on a bare perusal of this rule that an election petition may be presented to the Munsif within whose jurisdiction the place of Headquarters of the Panchayat is situated. It has been mentioned above that the headquarters of the Bhungra Panchayat with which we are concerned in the instant case are situate with the Sub-division of Tijara. It has been explained above that each of the three Munsiffs in the Sub Division has his local jurisdiction, under Sec. (1) of Sec. 7 of the Ordinance, extending throughout the Sub-Division. That being so, Munsiff of Kishangarh Bas Tehsil before whom this election petition was presented has local jurisdiction throughout Sub-Division of Tijara including village Bhungra where the headquarters of the Bhungra Panchayat is situate. The mere fact that the civil business of Mandawar Tehsil has not been assigned by the District Judge to the Munsiff Kishangarh Bas Tehsil cannot possibly detract from the legal position that the Munsif Kishangarh Bas Tehsil has local jurisdiction throughout the Sub - Division of Tijara, Therefore, any election petition pertaining to a Panchayat having its headquarter within the said Sub-Division can be presented to the Munsiff Kishangarh Bas Tehsil, and indeed to any of the three Munsiffs functioning in the Sub-Division. This does not however mean that the respondent in the election petition, who is petitioner herein, as no say in the matter. If he is genuinely aggrieved by the election petition having been presented to a Munsiff who is not ordinarily dealing with the civil business of Mundawar Tehsil to which this election petition relates, it will be open to him to seek transfer of this election petition from Mnnsiff Kishangarh Bas to Additional Munsiff, Mundawar Tehsil under rule 86 (A) of the Rules of 1960. If such an application is moved on behalf of the petitioner, the District Judge will have to decide it according to law. Moreover, it will also give the District Judge an occasion to ascertain from the Munsiff Kishangarh Bas Tehsil as to why he entertained as election petition pertaining to Mundawar Tehsil.
(3.) THE petitioner has also challenged the vires of the Rules of 1960. THE Munsif has held that the said rules are valid. I do not propose to go into this matter in the present writ petition. If the election petition is eventually allowed by the Munsiff, the petitioner will be free to raise this issue by way of writ petition or in any other manner open to him. In conclusion, I hold that Munsif Kishangarh Bas has local jurisdiction in the matter and that therefore this writ petition has no merit. It is accordingly dismissed in limine. .;