NANHOO MAL & ORS. versus HIRA MAL & ORS.

NANHOO MAL & ORS. versus HIRA MAL & ORS.

The only remedy for challenging elections to the office of President of a Municipal Board, as per the U.P. Municipalities Act, is by means of an election petition presented after the election, and not by writ proceedings under Article 226. The High Court lacked jurisdiction to interfere at an intermediate stage.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Nanhhoo Mal; Respondent: Hira Mal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 September 1975
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Allahabad High Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Writ Jurisdiction, Elections to Local Bodies, Procedure for Challenging Municipal Elections
Constitutional Law Local Government Law Election Law Writ Jurisdiction Elections to Local Bodies Procedure for Challenging Municipal Elections

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nanhhoo Mal

Appellant

Hira Mal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Allahabad High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court can interfere in municipal election matters under Article 226 of the Constitution
  2. 2 Validity of election procedure for President of Municipal Board under statutory and procedural rules

Ratio Decidendi

The only remedy for challenging elections to the office of President of a Municipal Board, as per the U.P. Municipalities Act, is by means of an election petition presented after the election, and not by writ proceedings under Article 226. The High Court lacked jurisdiction to interfere at an intermediate stage.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the High Court set aside.
  • No order as to costs.