2025:UHC:7204 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2226 of 2025 Lalit Joshi … Petitioner Versus Returning Officer, Urban Locak Bodies Election 2024 And Others … Respondents Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.N. Joshi, Deputy AG, for the State. Mr. Yogesh Pande, Advocate, for the caveator. J U D G M E N T Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Petitioner filed an election petition challenging election of respondent no. 2 as Mayor of Municipal Corporation, Haldwani-Kathgodam. Since the election petition was filed beyond limitation period, therefore, he also filed an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condoning the delay. Election Tribunal/District Judge, Nainital rejected the delay condonation application as not maintainable and thus dismissed the election petition, filed by the petitioner. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order passed by Election Tribunal/District Judge on 24.4.2025. 2. Uttarakhand Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 is a self-contained code, which provides the grounds on which election of a person elected as Mayor/Corporator can be challenged. The forum for making such challenge, the period of limitation for filing election petition and also the form of the election petition are prescribed in the said Act. Section 61 and 2025:UHC:7204 2 66 of the Act, which are relevant for deciding this writ petition, are extracted below: “61. Questioning of election of Mayor or Deputy Mayor.- (1) The election of a person as Mayor or Deputy Mayor may be questioned by any unsuccessful candidate or by any person whose nomination paper was rejected or by any member of the Corporation by presenting a petition to the District Judge exercising jurisdiction in the City on anyone or more of the grounds mentioned in Section 71. (2) The petition shall be presented within seven days of the declaration of the result of election. 66. Petition when to be dismissed.-If an election petition has not been presented within the time allowed by this Act or it does not comply with any provisions made under Section 79 relating to deposit of security or the necessary court-fee payable thereon is not furnished within the time allowed therefor it shall forthwith be rejected by the District Judge.” 3. Perusal of Section 61 of the aforesaid Act reveals that the limitation prescribed for filing election petition for challenging election of a Mayor is only seven days from the date of declaration of result of election. There is no provision for condonation of delay. 4. Section 66 of the Act unequivocally provides that if election petition is not presented within the time prescribed by the Act, then it shall forthwith be rejected by the District Judge. 5. Admittedly, the result of the election of Mayor was declared on 25.1.2025 and the election petition was filed by the petitioner on 6.2.2025. Since 2025:UHC:7204 3 the limitation prescribed is seven days, therefore, election petition would have been within time up to 1.2.2025. Thus, there was delay of five days in filing the election petition. 6. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its judgment rendered on 4.9.2015 in Civil Appeal No. 6848 of 2015, Smita Subhash Sawant v. Jagdeeshwari Jagdish Amin & Others, held as under: “30. It is a settled principle of rule of interpretation that the Court cannot read any words which are not mentioned in the Section nor can substitute any words in place of those mentioned in the section and at the same time cannot ignore the words mentioned in the section. Equally well settled rule of interpretation is that if the language of statute is plain, simple, clear and unambiguous then the words of statute have to be interpreted by giving them their natural meaning. [See. Interpretation of statute by G.P. Singh 9th Edition page 44/45]. Our interpretation of Section 33 (1) read with Section 28 (k) is in the light of this principle. 31. We accordingly, hold that the list prescribed under Section 28(k) was available for inspection and sale to the voters of the ward in question on 17.02.2012. In view of this finding, the limitation to file election petition would begin from 17.02.2012 and it will be up to 27.02.2012. In other words, period of limitation of 10 days prescribed for filing the election petition in Section 33(1) of the Act would begin from 17.02.2012 and it would be up to 27.02.2012. 32. It was, therefore, necessary for respondent No. 1 (election petitioner) to have filed the election petition on any day between 17.02.2012 to 27.02.2012. Since the election petition was filed on 28.02.2012, a date beyond 27.02.2012, it was liable to be dismissed as being barred by limitation. In the absence of any provision made in the Act 2025:UHC:7204 4 for condoning the delay in filing the election petition, the Chief Judge had no power to condone the delay in filing the election petition beyond the period of limitation prescribed in law. Indeed, no such argument was advanced by the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 in this regard.” 7. It is common knowledge that election petitions have to be filed within limitation period specified in relevant statutes and there is no provision for condonation of delay. Provisions of Limitation Act do not apply to election petitions. Thus learned District Judge was justified in holding that provisions of Limitation Act would not be applicable for condoning the delay. 8. This Court do not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned in the writ petition. Writ petition thus fails and is dismissed. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to assail the legality of the provision, regarding limitation period provided for filing election petition, before appropriate forum. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 14.8.2025 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957B E53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2025.08.18 18:57:33 +05'30'