Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 1623 (ALL)

Shyam Lal Kushwaha v. State of U. P.

2004-08-20

MARKANDEY KATJU, UMESHWAR PANDEY

body2004
ORDER M. Katju and U. Pandey, JJ.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The only prayer of the petitioners in this petition is that the election of Vice President of Municipal Board, Baruwasagar, Jhansi, be held at the premises of the Municipality building, Baruwasagar, Jhansi and not in any other place. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on Section 54A (2) of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, which states : “Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 54, the meeting for the election of the Vice-President shall be held at the office of the Municipality and on the date and time appointed by the District Magistrate. The notice of the meeting and the date and time appointed therefor shall be sent to every member of the Municipality at his place of residence seven clear days before the date fixed for the meeting. A copy of such notice shall also be published in such manner as the District Magistrate may direct, and upon such publication, every member shall be deemed to have received the notice.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has laid emphasis on the word ‘shall’ used in the above provision. Hence he submitted that the election can only be held at the premises of the Municipal building, and not at any other place. We do not agree. 5. In our opinion the provision for holding the election at the office of the Municipality is only directory and not mandatory. Hence the word ‘shall’ so far as it refers to the venue of the meeting, has to be interpreted as ‘may’. It is well-settled that sometimes ‘shall’ can be interpreted as ‘may’ and ‘may’ can be interpreted as ‘shall’. 6. The petitioners may have a right to insist that the election should be held, but they cannot have a right to say that the election should be held at a particular place. The authorities have a large number of considerations for deciding the place where the election should be held and it is not appropriate for this Court to insist that the election should be held at one particular place. There may be law and order problems, there may be no place in the Municipal office for holding the election in a proper and orderly manner, the Municipal office may be in a dilapidated condition, etc. There may be law and order problems, there may be no place in the Municipal office for holding the election in a proper and orderly manner, the Municipal office may be in a dilapidated condition, etc. These are purely administrative matters, and hence it is not necessary to give opportunity of hearing or reasons for appointing a particular place for holding the election. 7. For the reason given above there is no merit in this petition and it is dismissed.