A. P. RAVANI, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONERS Nos. 1 2 and 3 are voters of Barwala Nagar Panchayat and they are residing within the limits of the Nagar Panchayat. Petitioners No. 4 is a duly elected member of the Panchayat. The election of the Nagar Panchayat was held on 17/11/1991 In this election one person contested from three different wards. But unfortunately he died before the date of election. Therefore election could not be held for three wards. Thus when the result of the election was declared only 12 members were declared elected out of total strength of 15 members of the Nagar Panchayat. ( 2 ) AFTER the result of the election was declared the Mamlatdar has ordered to convene the meeting of elected members on 28/11/1991 for the election of Chairman and Vice-chairman of the Panchayat. The petitioners have challenged the legality and validity of the notice and order convening the meeting by filing this petition on November 27 1991 This Court granted ad-interim relief directing that the meeting be held on 28/11/1991 but the business that may be taken shall not be implemented without the permission of the Court. When the petition came up for hearing it is declared that the meeting was convened on 28/11/1991 and the election for the post of Chairman and Vice-chairman has taken place. ( 3 ) THE petitioners contend that as provided under Section 13 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961 a Nagar Panchayat should consist of such number of members which should not be less than 15 and not more than 21. It is submitted that so far as Barwala Nagar Panchayat is concerned there are in all 15 members. But the election of only 12 members has taken place and election in respect of three wards could not be held because one person who was contesting from three different wards died before the date of election. In view of this position it is submitted that there is no validly constituted Panchayat and therefore the meeting for electing the Chairman and Vice-chairman cannot be convened and no such decision can be taken. ( 4 ) HOWEVER if one reads Section 19 of the Act the contention raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted. In view of this position it is submitted that there is no validly constituted Panchayat and therefore the meeting for electing the Chairman and Vice-chairman cannot be convened and no such decision can be taken. ( 4 ) HOWEVER if one reads Section 19 of the Act the contention raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted. Section 19 (1) provides for eventuality in which for any reason the election does not result in the return of the required number of qualified persons willing to take office. In such a situation competent authority is empowered to appoint from persons qualified to be elected such persons that may be necessary to make up the required number and the persons so appointed shall be deemed to have been duly elected to the Relevant Panchayat. It is also provided that the names of the members so appointed should be published by the appointing authority in the prescribed manner. However it is also provided in Section 19 (1-A) that nothing in sub-Sec. (1) shall be deemed to authorise the competent authority to appoint a Sarpanch in a case where the elected Sarpanch is not willing to take office or where there has been failure to elect a Sarpanch. Section 19 (2) is relevant which reads as follows : notwithstanding anything contained in sub-Sec. (1) where two-thirds or more of the total number of members required to be elected are elected failure to elect the remaining members shall not affect the constitution of the relevant Panchayat. As far as Barwala Nagar Panchayat is concerned out of the total 15 members of the Panchayat 12 members have been elected. Thus more than two-third of the members have been elected. In such an eventuality the provisions of Section 19 (2) of the Act come into play. Out of the total number of 15 members 12 members have been elected. This is certainly more that two-third of the total number of members. Only three members have not been elected on account of sad demise of a contesting candidate. Since more than two-third of the members have been elected it does not affect the constitution of the Panchayat. This is the clear mandate of the Legislature. There is no reason why the provisions of Section 19 (2) of the Act be not allowed to have its full play when the necessary condition for its applicability is fulfilled. Since more than two-third of the members have been elected it does not affect the constitution of the Panchayat. This is the clear mandate of the Legislature. There is no reason why the provisions of Section 19 (2) of the Act be not allowed to have its full play when the necessary condition for its applicability is fulfilled. Precisely to meet with such an eventuality the provision is made by the Legislature. Therefore simply because less than 15 members have been elected it cannot be said that there is no valid constitution of the Panchayat. ( 5 ) IN view of the provisions of Rule 6 of Gujarat Nagar Panchayat (Up-Sarpanch Chairman Vice chairman) Election Rules 1962 it is contended that if the election of the Chairman and Vice-chairman is allowed to take place now the members who may be elected from three different wards will not have chance to contest for the post of Chairman and Vice-chairman. Therefore it is submitted that the election of Chairman and Vice-chairman of the Panchayat should be postponed till the election of members from tree different wards takes place. The contention cannot be accepted for the simple reason that the provisions of the Rules cannot be interpreted so as to supersede the provisions of Section 19 (2) of the Act. In case of conflict the substantive or the parent provisions of the Act will have overriding effect over the provisions of the Rules. However in the instant case it cannot be said that there is conflict between the two provisions. Examining the question from any of the point of view the election for the post of Chairman and Vice-chairman cannot be postponed till the election wards takes place. If interpretation as canvassed by the petitioner as accepted even with postponing of election in ward the Panchayat should have minimum 15 members. But to overcome such difficulty the Legislature has made the provisions as indicated in Section 19 (2) of the Act which inter alia provides that wherever two-third of the members are elected the constitution of the Panchayat would not be affected. Thus the contention based on the provisions of Rule 6 of the Gujarat Nagar Panchayat (Up-Sarpanch Chairman Vice-chairman) Election Rules 1962 has also no merits. ( 6 ) NO other contention is raised. ( 7 ) THERE is no substance in the petition. Hence it is liable to the rejected. Thus the contention based on the provisions of Rule 6 of the Gujarat Nagar Panchayat (Up-Sarpanch Chairman Vice-chairman) Election Rules 1962 has also no merits. ( 6 ) NO other contention is raised. ( 7 ) THERE is no substance in the petition. Hence it is liable to the rejected. ( 8 ) IN the result the petition is rejected. Rule discharged. Ad-interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. ( 9 ) AT this stage the learned Counsel for the petitioners has requested for continuing the interim relief for some time. In the facts of the case it would not be proper to grant the request. Hence the request to continue the interim relief for some time is refused. Rule discharged. .