JAGAT NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition by one Karnidan Singh against an order of the Civil Judge, Bikaner, holding that he has jurisdiction to hear the election petition, which has been transferred to him by the order of the District Judge, Bikaner.
(2.) MANGALCHAND respondent filed an election petition before the District Judge, Bikaner, on 29. 1. 64 challenging the election of Karnidan Singh to Ward No. 11 of the Bikaner Municipal Council. On 31. 1. 1964 the District Judge passed an order transferring the petition for trial to the Civil Judge, Bikaner, without recording any reason. Sec. 40 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 runs as follows - 40. Who shall hear petition.- (1) An election petition may be presented to and shall be heard by - (a) the District Judge, sitting at the place where the municipal office is situated. (b) where there is no such District Judge, the Civil Judge, so sitting, or (c) any other Judge specially appointed by the State Government for the purpose. Provided that, where an election petition is presented as aforesaid to a District Judge, he may for reasons to be recorded in writing transfer the same for hearing and disposal to a Civil Judge, subordinate to him and sitting at the place where the municipal office is situated. (2) The District Judge or Civil Judge or any other Judge to whom an election petition is presented or transferred and by whom it is heard in accordance with the provisions of the sub-sec. (1) is hereinafter referred to as the Judge. " When notice of the petition was served on Karnidan Singh he took an objection to the hearing of the petition by the Civil Judge on the ground that the order of the District Judge transferring the petition to him for trial is illegal as no reasons were recorded as provided under sec. 40 of the Act. The learned Civil Judge held that the order of transfer was not invalid. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and am of the opinion that the decision of the learned Civil Judge is correct. On behalf of the petitioner it is contended that the policy of the Legislature is that municipal election petition should ordinarily be tried by the District Judge, if there is one, sitting at the place where the municipal office is situated and so the provision laying down that it can be transferred to the Civil Judge for disposal only for reasons to be recorded in writing should be considered to be mandatory. Reliance was placed on the following observations made by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Baburam (1) - "for ascertaining the real intention of the Legislature, the Court may consider inter alia the nature and the design of the statute, and the consequences which would follow from construing it one way or the other, the impact of other provisions whereby the necessity of complying with the provisions in question is avoided, the circumstances that the statute provides for a contingency of the non compliance with the provisions, the fact that the non-compliance is or is not visited by some penalty, the serious or trivial consequences that flow therefrom, and above all, whether the object of the legislation will be defeated or furthered. " In my opinion the provisions with regard to the recording of the reasons in writing before transferring an election petition for disposal to a Civil Judge should not be regarded to be mandatory. It can not be said on a perusal of the provisions contained in sec. 40 that the policy of the Legislature was that municipal election petitions should be heard only by District Judges. If that were so, no provision for the hearing of the election petition by any other officer would have been made. Under clause (c) of sec. 40 (1) even Munsifs have been specially empowered by the State Government to hear Municipal election petitions. The most usual reason for transferring an election to a Civil Judge by District Judge is that he has more work on his file than he can dispose of. It does not make a material difference whether or not he records this reason. The legislature has not prescribed the reasons for which an election petition can be transferred by the District Judge to the Civil Judge. I accordingly dismiss the writ petition and discharge the interim stay order passed by this Court on 23. 7. 1965. Let the learned Civil Judge be informed of it. In the circumstances of the case, I direct that parties shall bear their own costs of this writ petition. .;