JUDGMENT R.S. Pathak, J. - The appellant was elected Pradhan of a Gaon Sabha. The second respondent filed a petition challenging his election under Section 12-C of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, and the Judicial Officer, Ghaziur, functioning as an election tribunal allowed the petition and set side the election of the appellant. Against this order the appellant filed petition for certiorari in this Court, and that petition has been dismissed by our broher Broome. 2. The election of the appellant was set aside on the ground that the nomination of the second respondent had been improperly rejected by the Returning Officer. The nomination was rejected because the Returning Officer held that the second respondent was less than 30 years of age. He did so on the basis of an entry in the Register of Members. Tillie Judicial Officer, upon the election petition before him, took into consideration the material filed by the second respondent to show that he was actually over 30 years of age and, therefore, was qualified to be chosen as Pradhan. Upon consideration of that material the Judicial Officer accepted the contention of the second respondent and held that his nomination had been improperly rejected. That finding of the Judicial Officer was challenged in the petition for certiorari, and has been challenged again before us. 3. Learned counsel points to the provisions of Section 9(2) of the Act and contends that the entry of the age of the second respondent therein showing him as under 30 years old was final and that the Judicial Officer was not entitled to consider any evidence apart from that entry. 4. The provisions of Section 9, as they stood at the relevant time, read as follows: "9. Register of Members. (1) On the establishment of a Gaon Sabha, the prescribed authority shall cause to be prepared a register, in the prescribed form, of all persons ordinarily residing within the jurisdiction of such Gaon Sabha and such register shall, among other things, contain the names of every person entitled under Section 5 to be a member of the Gaon Sabha on the date of its establishment. The Register so prescribed shall be revised at least once a year in the manner prescribed. The Register so prescribed shall be revised at least once a year in the manner prescribed. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, on person who is not, and every person who is, for the time being entered in the register as member, shall be entitled to vote at any election or in any other proceeding under this Act or the rules framed thereunder, or to be elected, nominated or appointed to any office in the Gaon Sabha, Gaon Panchayat or Nyaya Panchayat." 5. The register of members prepared under Section 90) is a register of all persons ordinarily residing within the jurisdiction of the Gaon Sabha, and the sub-section requires that it shall include the names of every person entitled under section 5 to be a member of the Gaon Sabha on the date when it is established. Section 5 determines who shall and who shall not be member of the Gaon Sabha. It provides that a Gaon Sabha shall consist of all adults ordinarily resident in the area for which it is established subject to the exception that a person shall be disqualified for being a member of the Gaon Sabha if he is not a citizen of India or is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court. 6. The qualification for membership of a Gaon Sabha is not sufficient to qualify a person for the office of Pradhan. Not only must a person be a member of a Gaon Sabha but he must also, by reason of Section 3-B, not be less than 30 years of age. Moreover, a person, otherwise qualified for being chosen and for holding the office of Pradhan, may be disqualified in that behalf if the suffers from any of the disqualifications mentioned in Section 5-A. A person who desires to stand for election to the office of Pradhan must, therefore, establish not only that he is a member of the Gaon Sabha but also that he is not less than 30 years of age, and he must also not be a person who is disqualified under Section 5-A. 7. The Register of Members prepared under Sec, 9(1) merely shows that the persons entered therein are persons who are entitled to member ship of the Gaon Sabha. The Register of Members prepared under Sec, 9(1) merely shows that the persons entered therein are persons who are entitled to member ship of the Gaon Sabha. That is not sufficient, as we have pointed out, to qualify those persons for being chosen for and holding the office of Pradhan. When Section 9(2) declares that a person who is entered in the Regiater of Members is entitled to be elected, nominated or appointed to any office in the Gaon Sabha, it merely declares that one of the qualifications necessary for the election, nomination or appointment for that office, namely, that such person is a member of the Gaon Sabha, is established by the entry. 8. It is not possible to accept the contention that the entry as to age made in the Register is conclusive as to the age of the person in respect of whom it is made. Section 9(2) does not attribute this conclusive character to the entry as to age in the Register, that character belongs under the plain provisions of the sub-section only to the entry of membership. The non-obstinate clause "Not withstanding anything contained in this Act" in the sub-section, upon which considerable emphasis has been laid by learned counsel, merely precludes a fresh consideration of those provisions of the Act relating to membership of a Gaon Sabha on the basis of which the Register of Members prepared, and those considerations, in our opinion, are the provisions of Section 5 which indicate the qualifications necessary for being a member of the Gaon Sabha. 9. Learned counsel relies upon Mohiuddin v. The Election Tribunal for Town Area, 1959 ALJ 169 and Daryao Singh v. Additional S.D.O., 1963 ALJ 401 We think that those decisions are not relevant to the question before us. The point before the Court in those cases was whether the question that certain persons are entitled to vote could be examined with reference to material other than the electoral roll in the first case or the Register of Members in the other. The point before the Court in those cases was whether the question that certain persons are entitled to vote could be examined with reference to material other than the electoral roll in the first case or the Register of Members in the other. Mohiuddin's case (supra) was concerned with the election of the Chairman of the Town Area Committee, and Rule 5 of the U. P. Town Areas (Conduct of Election of Chairman) Rules, 1953, declared that the electors in a Town Area shall for the purpose of election of Chairman be the electors entered in the electoral rolls of the wards of that Town Area, and Section 2(13) of the U. P. Town Area Act, 1914, defined an elector in relation to a ward as a person whose name was for the time being entered in the electoral roll of that ward. Upon that definition, it is apparent that the relevant electoral roll could alone be consulted for determining whether a person was an elector. And that is why this Court held that "the status of an elector is given by the entry of the name in the electoral roll" (per Dayal, J. p. 171). In Daryao Singh's case(supra) Oak, J. was called upon to consider merely whether, for the purpose of determining who was entitled to vote at an election or in any other proceeding under the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, the entry as member in the Register of Members was conclusive. The right to vote belongs, by Section 9 (2) of that Act, to a person who is for the time being entered in the Register as a member. That is the sole criterion under that Act for determining whether a person possesses the right to vote. The question raised there was similar to that arising in Mohiuddin's case' (supra), and indeed Oak, J. took support from the principle laid down in that case. The question in the instant appeal must be decided upon different considerations. The question here is whether the entry of the age of a person made in the Register of Members is conclusive when considering whether he was not less than 30 years of age and, therefore, qualified to be chosen as Pradhan. Section 9(2) merely declares that the person who is for the time being entered in the Register as member shall be entitled to vote. Section 9(2) merely declares that the person who is for the time being entered in the Register as member shall be entitled to vote. It does not say that the entry of age of a person in the Register shall be conclusive whenever question of age is relevant under any provision of the Act. 10. In this view of the matter, the entry in the Register of Members showing the age of the second respondent as under 30 years old was not conclusive and it was open to the Judicial Officer, when trying the election petition, to examine other material on the record before him and to determine what was the true age of the second respondent. 11. We see no force in this appeal. It is summarily dismissed.