Municipal election candidature rule upheld where ward enrolment was read broadly under the statutory scheme.

The commentary examines whether Rule 11(2) of the Bombay Borough Municipalities Election Rules, 1950, was consistent with Section 11A(2) of the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act so as to allow a person enrolled in one ward's voters list to contest from another ward within the same municipal borough. It states that the majority construed the phrase "any ward of the municipal borough" broadly, treated the rule as aligned with the statutory election scheme, and accepted it as contemporaneous legislative exposition. The earlier contrary view was overruled, while the dissent would have treated the rule as ultra vires.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rule 11(2) of the Bombay Borough Municipalities Election Rules, 1950, was valid and consistent with Section 11A(2) of the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, so as to permit a person whose name appears in the voters list of one ward to stand for election in another ward of the same municipal borough.

Analysis: The majority read Section 11A(2) literally and in the light of the scheme of municipal elections under the Act. The expression "any ward of the municipal borough" was treated as wide enough to include every ward, and the reference to "the list of voters" was understood in the statutory context as the voters lists maintained for the borough wards. The majority held that the rule was not repugnant to the Act, that the statutory scheme did not require a candidate to be enrolled as a voter in the very ward from which he sought election, and that the rule could be supported as a contemporaneous legislative exposition. The contrary view in the earlier decision was expressly overruled. The dissent treated the ward-wise electoral scheme as requiring candidature only in the ward whose voters list contained the candidate's name and held the rule ultra vires.

Conclusion: Rule 11(2) was held to be valid and not inconsistent with Section 11A(2).

Final Conclusion: The answer to the referred question was returned in favour of the validity of the election rule, with the petitions to proceed before the original bench accordingly.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory language permits a wide and reasonable construction consistent with the legislative scheme, a delegated rule embodying that construction will be upheld unless it is plainly repugnant to the parent Act.

---