Certiorari and municipal election results: counting ballots and declaring the winner were held to be ministerial, not judicial.

Certiorari is available only to correct determinations made by a body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial power, not ministerial or administrative acts. In election proceedings, where the municipal council did not adjudicate any disputed issue or resolve the validity of votes, the presiding member's role in counting ballots and declaring the elected candidate remained ministerial. The election rules permitted rejection only of a voting paper invalid on its face, such as one bearing the voter's signature or more than one cross, and conferred no authority to decide broader questions of vote validity. On that footing, the act challenged was not a judicial determination, so certiorari was not available.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ of certiorari could issue to quash the municipal council's declaration of the election result and whether the presiding member's acts in counting votes and declaring the result were judicial or merely ministerial.

Analysis: Certiorari lies to correct determinations of bodies exercising judicial functions, not ministerial or administrative acts. The election proceedings disclosed no adjudication by the council on any disputed issue and no resolution deciding the validity of votes. The presiding member's duty was confined to counting the voting papers and declaring the candidate elected. Under the election rules, only a voting paper that was invalid on its face, such as one bearing the voter's signature or more than one cross, could be rejected; beyond that, the rules conferred no authority to decide questions of validity. The act complained of was therefore not a judicial or quasi-judicial determination.

Conclusion: Certiorari was not available, and the application was liable to be dismissed.

---