JUDGMENT V.G. Oak, J. - This writ petition is directed against a decision of an Election Tribunal dismissing an election petition. Sri Ram Singh is the Petitioner. Ram Adhar Singh is the principal opposite party. 2. According to the Petitioner's affidavit, election for the office of Pradhan of Gaon Sabha of Duhin Kalan in district Mirzapur was held in December, 1955. Sri Ram Singh and Ram Adhar Singh were the rival candidates for the office. Ram Adhar Singh received 106 votes, while Sri Ram Singh received 103 votes. Some of the votes received by Ram Adhar were votes cast by minors. The Petitioner made a protest to that effect. Nonetheless Ram Adhar Singh was declared elected to the office of Pradhan. Sri Ram Singh filed an election petition challenging Ram Adhar Singh's election. In the election petition also Sri Ram Singh urged that some of the supporters of Ram Adhar Singh were miners. The election petition was dismissed by the learned Sub Divisional Officer, Chunar on 19-5-1956. Sri Ram Singh seeks by this writ petition to have that decision of 19-5-1956 quashed. 3. The main ground raised in this writ petition is that six persons who voted for Ram Adhar Singh were minors. On this point the Tribunal found against the Petitioner. It was held that the Petitioner failed to prove that the six persons were minors, or that they voted for the opposite party. For purposes of this writ petition, we may assume that the six persons mentioned by the Petitioner were minors, and that they voted for the opposite party. Still the election petition could not succeed. The Petitioner did not suggest that names of those six persons were not on the register of voters. We may, therefore, assume that, names of those six voters were on the register of electors. The question is whether those six persons were entitled to vote. 4. S. 5 of UP Panchayat Raj Act deals with membership of Gaon Sabha. Sub-section (1) of S. 5 stales: A Gaon Sabha shall consist of all adults ordinarily resident within the area for which it is established but a person shall be disqualified for being a member of the Gaon Sabha if he- (a) is not a citizen of India, or (b) is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court. 5. S. 6 of the Act deals with cessation of membership. 5. S. 6 of the Act deals with cessation of membership. Sub S. (1) of S. 6 states: A member of a Gaon Sabha shall cease to be a member if- (a) he is disqualified u/s 5, 6. The Register of Members is prepared u/Ch. IB, UP Panchayat Raj Rules. R.4H provides for claims and objections. Objections are disposed of u/R. 4J. R. 5 provides for final publication of the Register. According to sub-R. (2) of R. 5, the register so republished shall be final. 7. R. i9B of UP Panchayat Raj Rules deals with the right to vote. Sub-R. (1) of R. 19B states: No person who is not, and except as expressly provided by the Act, every person whose name is, for the time being entered in the Adult Register pertaining to the constituency shall be entitled to vote in that constituency. 8. Sub-R. (2) of R. 19B states:- "No person shall vote at the election in any constituency if he is subject to any of the disqualifications referred to in S. 5 of the Act. 9. Mr. V. K. Chowdhry appearing for the opposite party relies upon sub/R. 1(sic) of R. 19B. On the other hand the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon sub/R. (2) of R. 19B. 10. The question is whether a minor is subject to a disqualification for purposes of Sub-R. (2) of R. 19B. We have seen that S. 5 of the Act deals with the membership of Goan Sabha. Ordinarily a Goan Sabha consists of all adult residents within the area. But this provision is subject to the modification that a person who is disqualified shall not be a member of the Goan Sabha. The disqualifications specified in S. 5 are that the person is not a citizen of India, or that he has been declared of unsound mind by a competent Court. 11. According to S. 6 of the Act, a member shall cease to be a member if he is disqualified u/s 5. S. 6 will govern those cases where a person was initially a member but subsequently became subject to a disqualification. For example, a man may be at one stage a citizen of India, but may subsequently acquire citizenship of a foreign country. In such a case S. 6 will be attracted. A person who is major, can never subsequently be a minor. For example, a man may be at one stage a citizen of India, but may subsequently acquire citizenship of a foreign country. In such a case S. 6 will be attracted. A person who is major, can never subsequently be a minor. Such a case will not be governed by S. 6 of the Act. It, therefore, appears that the disqualification contemplated by S. 6 of the Act is confined to the two disqualifications expressed as such in S. 5. The disqualifications are citizenship of a foreign country, and a declaration by a competent Court that the person is of unsound mind. It appears that sub-R. 2) of R. 19-B also contemplates the same disqualifications, as are expressly mentioned in S. 5 of the Act. Minority is not such a disqualification. 12. The combined effect of S. 5 and R. 19-B is this: A person, whose name is recorded in the Adult Register is entitled to vote, even if the name is wrongly recorded in the Adult Register The Returning Officer and the Election Tribunal have to assume that, that person is entitled to vote. sub-R. (1) of R. 19-B is subject to sub R. (2) of R. 19-B. If a person's name is on the electoral roll, but he becomes disqualified u/s 5 of the Act, then he cannot vote. In the present case it was not suggested that the six persons in question were not citizens of India or were of unsound mind. So they were not subject to disqualifications referred to in S. 5 of the Act. Consequently, sub-R. (2) of R. 19B has no application. Those six persons were entitled to vote u/s ub-R. (1) of R. 19-B. The election petition was, therefore, bound to fail even on the assumption that those six persons were minors. 13. The petition u/Art. 226 of the Constitution is dismissed with costs.