KEDAR NATH GUPTA; HARISH SANGTANI AND DINESH KUMAR; NIRAN DAS Vs. STATE; STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions seek to challenge the order issued by the State Election Commission dated 26.2.2009 by which direction was issued for holding elections to the office of Chairmen of various Municipal Boards and the Mayor of the Municipal Corporation, Jaipur, in which vacancies caused for various reasons and primarily due to the fact that incumbents elected thereto either died or were elected as Members of Legislative Assembly in the recently held general elections.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that subject elections cannot be held because number of wards in each Municipalities are unrepresented. It is contended that consequential notification issued by various returning officers are not in conformity with Rule 10 of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Election) Rules, 1994 (for

(3.) Shri R.B. Mathur, learned counsel appearing for the State Election Commission argued that notification in each of these cases has been issued by the Returning Officers and with that, the process of election has commenced on 27.2.2009. In view of the bar contained in Article 243ZG of the Constitution of India, no interference can be made by this Court as the process of election has already started. Reliance in this connection is placed on judgment of the Supreme Court in Jaspal Singh Arora vs. State of M.P. & Ors.-(1998) 9 SCC 594 and Gurdeep Singh Dhillon vs. Satpal & Ors.- (2006) 10 SCC 616 and of this Court in Shanti Lal & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.-1995 (3) WLC (Raj.) 580 = RLW 1995(2) Raj. 659. It is argued that right to contest the election is only as legal right and it can be enforced only in terms of the provisions of the Statute concerned. Election of the Chairman / Mayor can be challenged only by way of filing election petition u/s. 66 of the Act of 1959.