Holding

The Court held that the Delimitation Rules, the Preparation of Electoral Rolls Rules, and the Election Commission Rules are all within the legislative competence, consistent with the Tripura Panchayats Act and the Constitution, and therefore valid.

Summary

The petitioner, Ratanlal Nath, challenged several rules made under the Tripura Panchayats Act, 1993, alleging they were ultra vires the Act and the Constitution. The issues concerned (i) provisos allowing use of records other than the last census for determining SC/ST and total population, (ii) sub‑rules governing the preparation and adoption of electoral rolls for the first general Panchayat elections, and (iii) a rule limiting the State Election Commissioner’s tenure to six months with possible re‑appointment. The Supreme Court held that the provisos merely fill gaps where census data are unavailable and are consistent with the definition of "population" in the Act and Article 243(f). It also held that the sub‑rules on electoral rolls are authorised by Sections 176, 177 and 183 of the Act and do not conflict with them. Finally, the Court found that the tenure limitation does not impair the Commissioner’s independence. Consequently, all the challenged rules were upheld and the State’s appeal was allowed while the petitioner’s appeal was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the proviso (ii) to sub‑rule (3) of Rule 3 and similar provisos in Rules 6 and 8 of the Tripura Panchayats (Delimitation of Constituencies) Rules, 1993, are inconsistent with the definition of "population" in Section 2(32) of the Tripura Panchayats Act and Article 243(f) of the Constitution.
Whether sub‑rules (3) to (7) of Rule 8‑A of the Tripura Panchayats (Preparation of Electoral Rolls) Rules, 1993, are ultra vires Sections 176, 177 and 183 of the Tripura Panchayats Act, 1993.
Whether Rule 3 of the Tripura Panchayats (Constitution of State Panchayat Election Commission) Rules, 1993, which limits the State Election Commissioner’s tenure to six months (with re‑appointment) infringes the independence guaranteed by the Constitution and the Act.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 243(f)

Subjects

Panchayat electionsDelimitation of constituenciesElectoral rollsPopulation definitionState Election Commissioner tenureIndependence of election commissionStatutory rules validityUltra viresConstitutional interpretation

Judgment

RATANLAL NATH ETC. A
v.
STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS. ETC.

FEBRUARY 25, 1997

(B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND K.S. PARIPOORNAN, JJ.] B

Constitution of India, 1950-Article 243(f)-Definition of popula-
tion--Population means the population as ascertained at the last preceeding
census of which relevant figures have been published.

Election Laws : Tripura Panchayats Act, 1993/Tripura Panchayats
c
(Delimitation of Constituencies) Rules 1993--Sections 2(32), 176, 177, 183,
228---R.ules 3(3) Proviso (ii), 6(4) Proviso (ii); 8(4)(c) Proviso (iiT-Deter-
mination of numbers ofSC!ST members to be elected on the basis of any
other authenticated recor~When census figures not available for any area of
Gram Panchayat/Panchayat Samiti/Zila Parisha~Held : Not inconsistent D
with definition of polulation in Section 2(32) of the Act and Aiticle 243(f) of
the Constitution of India.

Tripura Panchayat (Preparation of Electoral Rolls) Rules. 1993-Rule
8-A sub mies (3) to (7)-Adoption of electoral rolls assembly constituency E
for Gram Panchayat/Panchayat Samity/Zila Parisha~Held : Not inconsis-
tent with Sections 176, 177, 183 of the Tripura Panchayats Act-Rule made
pursuant to these sections to carry out the purpose of the Act to hold "General

- Elections" are peifectly valid and effective.

Tripura Panchayats (Constitution of State Panchayat Election Com- F
mission) Rules, 1993--Rule 3(3)-Limiting the tenure of $tale Election Com-
missioner to a period of six months-And also providing for his
reappointment for another tenn-Held: Does not diminish the independence

- of the office-Can not be challenged on the ground of such limitation of
tenure/when there was no allegation that elections were not properly con- G
ducted due to such limitation of tenure.

A writ petition was filed by a voter from the State of Tripura, in the
High Court challenging the validity of certain rules framed by the State in
P'!rsuance of Tripura Panchayats Act, 1993; He challenged Rule 8-A,
sub-rules (3) to (7) of the Tripura Panchayats (Prepration of Electoral H
475
476 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.
-i--
A Rolls), Rules, 1993) on the ground that these rules are inconsistent with
sections 176, 178 and 183 of the Act. He also challenged proviso (ii) to
sub-rue (3) of Rule 3, Proviso (ii) to sub-rule (4) of Rule 6 and proviso (ii)
to clause (c) of sub-rule 4 of Rule 8 of the Tripura Panchayats (Delimita-
tion of constituencies) Rules, 1993 alleging that these rules travel beyond
B the Act and therefore are invalid. Another .challenge of the writ petitioner
was against Rule 3 of Tripura Panchayats _(Constitution of State
Panchliyat Election Commission) ·Rules, 1993 on the ground that the
Constitution of India and the Act contemplate the State Panchayat Elec-
tion Commissioner to be an independent authority, not subject to control
of the State, limiting his tenure to a period not exceeding six months and
C at the same time providing for reappointment diminishes its inde-
pendence. The High Court partly allowed his writ petition and struck down
the rules as prayed for except Rule 3 of Tripura Panchayats (Constitution
of State Panchayat Election Commission) Rules, 1993. Being aggrieved, the
petitioner filed appeal before this Court praying for striking down of the
D said rule. The State also filed appeal against the order of the High Court.

;·
Allowing the appeal of the State and dismissing the appeal of the
Writ Petitioner-appellant, this Court

HELD : 1. Provisos (i) and (ii) to Rule 3(3) of the Tripura
E Panchayats (Delimitation of Constituencies) Rules, 1993 do not say that
·even where the census figures are available, the authorities should go to
other record. The provisos really provides for a situation where census
figures are not available. The Rules are inspired by the objective that the
elections have to be held and it is with the objective that the State has made
p the said provision. The said provisos can not be held to travel outside the
purview of the Tripura Panchayats Act, 1993. The rules are made for
carrying out the purpose of the enactment (Section 228(1) of the Act) and
the purpose of the Act is to ensure the conduct of the elections. Indeed,
part IX of the Constitutions was amended in 1973 to ensure periodic and
regular elections to Panchayats, which were not bing held regularly in
G many States. Not only the said provisos are not inconsistent with the
provisions of the Act and the Constitution, but they in fact further and
•
advance the object underlying the Act and Part-IX of the Constitution. I

Thus, proviso (ii) to sub-rule (3) of Rule 3, Proviso (ii) to sub-rule (4) of
Rule 6 and proviso (ii) to.clause C of sub-rule (4) of Rules 8 of the Tripura
H Panchayats (Delimitation of Constituencies) Rules, 1993 are intravires the
RATANLALNATHv. STATE 477

Constitution and the Tripura Pnachayat Act, 1993. The High Court was A
wrong in striking down the said rules on imporper reasonings. \.:
(484-G-H, 485-A--CJ

2. The High Court was also wrong in holding that sub- rules (3) to
(7) of Ruel 8-A of the Tripura Panchayats (Preparation of Electoral Rolls)
Rules, 1993, are contrary to sections 176, 177 and 183 of the Act. No B
reasoning is given by the High Court for invalidating the said sub-rules
except saying that "preparation of electoral rolls can not be synonymous
with the adoption of any electoral roll in view of the fact that the two
concepts are widely different and opposed to each other." The reasoning
given does not appear to be clear or cogent. Statutory rules can not be C
struck down on such ambiguous reasoning. Sub-rules (3) and (4), which
have been struck down, say that the relevant portion of the electoral rolls
of the Assembly Constituency shall be electoral rolls for the Gram
Pnachayat/Panchayat Samiti/Zila Parishad, whereas sub-rules (5), (6) and
(7) which too have been struck down deal with and provide for the "First
General Eelction". These sub-rules too provide that the electoral rolls of D
the Assembly Constituency shall be split up appropriately for the purpose
of the "First General Election" in respect of Gram Pnachayat, Panchayat
Samiti and Zita Parishad, as the case may be. These are treated as draft
electoral rolls and are published as such. After receipt of objec·
tions/claims, if any, final electoral rolls are published. Thus these electoral E
rolls are not only consistent with sections 176, 177 and 183, they are indeed
made pursuant to the said sections and are meant to carry out the purpose
of the enactment as a whole. [486-C-F]

3. The High Court was right in sustaining the validity of Rule 3 of F
the Tripura Panchayats (Constitution of State Panchayat Election Com·
mission) Rules, 1993. As per this Rule the State Election Commissioner
shall be appointed by the Government for a period of six months at a time.
He may be reappointed for another term, if he is not otherwise disqualified.
According to the writ petitioner, such a provision detracts from and
militates against the concept of independence of such authority. This G
contention is not acceptable. Besides, it is not suggested that the elections
conducted by the State Election Commission were not properly conducted
or that the elections are void on account of the said limitation of his tenure.
The contention as such is untenable and has been rightly rejected by the
High Court. (487-D-EJ H
478 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) 2 S.C.R.

A 4. It is clarified that only questions relating to the validity of the
Rules are dealt with in this case. The validity or correctness of the
proceedings taken or acts done under those Rules are not dealt with, since
those are matters outside the purview of the writ petition filed in the High.
Court. [487-F]

B Anugrah Narain Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (1996) 8 J.T. 733 SC,
referred to.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1640 of
1997 Etc.
c From the Judgment and Order dated 3.5.94 of the Assam High Court
at Gauhati, in C.R. No. 74 of 1994 .

. Jaideep Gupta, Ms. Radha Rangaswamy for the Appellants.

D P.K. Goswamy Rajiv Mehta, Ms. Arnita Verma for the Respondent
(State of Tripura).

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

E B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. Leave granted in both the Special Leave
Petitions.

Civil 'Appeal No. 1641 of 1997 (arising from Special Leave Petition
(C) No. 22702 of 1994) is preferred by the State of Tripura, while the other
ci~l appeal (arising form Special Leave Petition (C) No. 10413 of 1994) is
F preferred by a voter who was the writ petitioner before the High Court.
The main challenge in the writ petition was to the validity of certain rules
framed by the State of Tripura under and in pursuance of the Tripura
Panchayats Act, 1993. The High Court has struck down sub-rules (3) to (7)
of Rule 8-A of the Tripura Panchayats (Preparation of Electoral Rolls)
Rules, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "Panchayat Rules") and proviso (ii)
G to sub-rule (3) of Rule 3, proviso (ii) to sub-rule (4) of Rule 6 and proviso
(ii) to clause (c) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 8 of the Tripura Panchayats
(Delimitation of Constituencies) Rules, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as
"Delimitation Rules"). The High Court, h.owever substained the validity of
Rule 3 of the Tripura Panchayats (Constitution of State Panchayat Eelction
H Commission) Rules, 1993.
RATANLALNATHv. STATE[B.P.JEEVANREDDY,J.] 479

The Tripura Legislative Assembly enacted the Tripura Panchayats A
Act, 1993 in the light of and to bring the law relating to panchayats in
conformity with the purpose, substance and direction of the Constitution
(73rd Amendment) Act, 1993. The Act has created a three-tier system.
Gram Panchayats are constituted for Gram (villages), Panchayat Samities
at the block level and Zilla Parishads at the district level. The Act provides B
for the constitution and composition of these bodies. besides providing for
their powers, duties and functions et at. We may briefly notice the relevant
provisions of the Act. Clause (16) of Section 2 defines the expression "First
General Election". It means "the First General Election of members held
for constitution of Gram Panchayats, Panchayat Samities and Zilla
Parishads after commencement of this Act''. The subject-matter of the C
present proceedings is the "First General Election". Clause (32) in Section
2 defines the expression "population" to mean "the population as ascer-
tained at the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been
published". Section 3 provides for the constitution of the Gram. Section 11
provides that for every Gram there shall be constituted a Gram Panchayat. D
Section 12 provides inter alia that the strength of a Gram Panchayat shall
not be less than nine and shall not exceed fifteen. Section 13 provides that
each Gram shall be divided into not less than five but not more than fifteen
constituencies. Section 14 provides for reservation of seats in every Gram
Panchayat in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Similar
provision is made in respect of Panchayat Samities and Zilla Parishads as E
well. Section 176 provides for the constitution of a State Panchayat Election

-
Commission. The Commission is vested with the power of superintendence,
direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls and the
conduct of all elections to Panchayat Bodies under the Act and the Rules
made thereunder. Section 177 says that "for each constituency, there shall F
be an electoral roll showing the names of the persons qualified to vote. The
electoral roll shall be prepared in accordance with the provisions of this
Act and the Rules made thereunder". Section 183 provides for preparation,
revision and correction of electoral rolls. Section 189 bars the jurisdiction
of the civil court in respect of matters provided by the Act. Section 213
bars the court from granting an injunction interfering with the process of G
election. Section 228 empowers the State government to make rules for
carrying out the purposes of the Act.

In exercise of the rules-making power conferred by Section 228, the
State government has framed the aforesaid three sets of rules among H
480 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.

A others. We may first notice the relevant provisions of the Delimitation
Rules. Rule 3 provides for determinmation of number of members for a
Gram Panchayat and the number of members of Scheduled Tribes,
Scheduled Castes and women in each Panchayat. The number of members
of each Panchayat is related to the population of each Gram. For a Gram,
B the population of which does not exceed three thousand, the number of
members is _nine (which is the minimum number prescribed by the Act)
and for a Gram the population of which exceeds six thousand, the number
of members is fifteen (the maximum prescribed by the Act). Sub-rule (3)
provides for the reservation of seats in favour of Scheduled Tribes and
Scheduled Castes whereas sub-rule (4) provides for reservation in favour
C of women. Having regard to the nature of the controversy involved herein,
it would be appropriate to set out sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 in its entirety :

"(3) The number of the Scheduled Castes members and the
Scheduled Tribes members to be elected from among the members
determined under sub-clause (1), which shall bear, as nearly as
D may be, the same proportion with the number of the members of
the Gram Panchayat as the Scheduled Castes population or the
Scheduled Tribes population, as the case may be, bears with the
total population in the Gram :

Provided that -
E
(i) the number of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes
or the total population in a Gram shall be determined primarily
on the basis of the last preceding census of which the relevant ...
figures are published.
F
(ii) when census figures are not available for any area of a Gram,
the prescribed authority shall, subject to such order of the State
Government as may be made in this behalf, determine the number
of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes or the total I
population on the basis of any other authenticated record main-
G tained by any office or organisation of any department of the State
Government or, where no such record is available, on the basis of
a local enquiry, which may include house to house enumeration,
caused by him for the purposes as aforesaid after consulting where
necessary, any portion of the census report, eelctoral roll of the
H Tripura Legislative Assembly or any other authenticated record
RATANLALNATHv. STAlE[B.P.JEEVANREDDY,J.] 481

that may be of assistance; A
(iii) when it is ascertained from the available records that one or
more portions of the area of a Gram have, in all such portions
taken together, the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes
population Constituting less than one per cent of the total popula-
tion of the Gram, such Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes B
population figures in respect of such portions shall not be taken
into account for the pupose of sub-clause (3);

(iv) the Sub-Divisional Migistrate by an order in writing, shall
record, before publication of the draft of the order in Form A, the C
procedure adopted, the records and documents relied upon and
the findings made for the purpose of determination of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes members."

(Emphasis added)
D
Rule 6 deals with determination of number of members and con-
stituencies for Panchayat Samiti and the reservation of seats in favour of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in each Panchayat Samiti. Sub-rule
(4) of Rule 6 corresponds to sub-rule (3) of Rules 3. It is, therefore,
unnecessary to set out the said sub-rule. Rule 8, in turn, deals with
determination of number of constituencies and allotment of seats to E
Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes in each Zilla Parishad. The
relevant provisions of clause (c) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 8 are in pan· materia
with sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 and, therefore, the said clause or sub-rule too
need not be set out.
F
The scheme of the three sub-rules aforementioned is identical, viz.,
(a) the number of Scheduled Castes members and Scheduled Tribes mem-
bers to be elected shall bear, as nearly as may be, the same proportion with
the number of members of the Gram Panchayat as the population of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes bears with the total population in
the Gram, in the Panchayat Samiti area and in the area of Zilla Parishad, G
as the case may be (Rule 3(3), Rule 6(4) and Rule 8(4)(c) - main limb; (b)
the population of the Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes as well as
· total population of a Gram, Panchayat Samiti area of Zilla Parishad area
shall be determined primarily on the basis of last preceding census of which
the relevant figures are published (proviso (i) appended to each of the H
482 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 2 S.C.R.

A above sub-rules); and (c) in case where census figures are not available for
any area of a Gram/Panchayat Simiti/Zilla Parishad, the prescribed
authority shall determine the population of the Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, or for that matter, the total population of a
Gram/Panchayat Samiti area/Zilla Parishad area "on the basis of any other
authenticated record maintained by any office or organization of any
B department of the State Government or where no such record is available,
on the basis of local enquiry, after consulting, where necessary, any portion
of the census report, relevant electoral roll of the Tribunal Legislative
Assembly or any other authenticated record that may be of assistance".
(Proviso (ii) to each of the above sub-rules). There are certain other
C provisions in sub-rule (3) which are not necessary to notice for the purpose
of this case.

Tripura Panchayats (Preparation of Electoral Rolls) Rules, 1993
(Panchayat Rules) have been made to regulate the preparation and publi-
D cation of electoral rolls under the said Act and to provide for other
incidental matters. Stib-rule (1) of Rule 8 provides that "there shall be an
Electoral Roll which shall be prepared in accordane with the provisions of
the Tripura Panchayats Act under the superintendence, direction and
control of the State Panchayat Election Commission". The other sub-rule
E provide for publcation of a draft electoral roll, considerations of objections
. received and publication of the final electoral roll. Rule Rule 8-A was
inserted in these rules by an amendment published in the Gazette dated
December 29, 1993. It deals with the preparation of the electoral rolls for
the "First General Election". Sub-rule (1) provides that for the purpose of
"First General Election", the State Panchayat Eelction Commission shall,
F in consultation with the State government, draw up the programme for
publication of the draft electoral rolls and the final electoral rolls and other
incidental matters. Sub-rule (2) Provides that in connection with the
preparation of such electoral rolls, the State Election Commissioner shall
publish the dates for publication of draft electoral rolls, the last date for
G filing claims/objections and the date of final publication of the ele~toral
rolls. Sub-rule (3). provides that "so much of the electoral rolls of any
Assembly constituency or, as the case may be, Assembly constituencies for
the time being in force, as relates to the area comprised within the
panchayats, shall be the electoral rolls for the election of members of Grani
H Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti and Zilla Parishad". Sub-rule (4) similarly
RATANLAL NATII v. STATE [B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.] 483

provides that "so much of the electoral rolls for any Assembly Constituency A
or, as the case may be, Assembly constituencies for the time being in force
as it relates to the areas comprised within a constituency or constituencies
of Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti and Zilla Parishad shall be the
electoral rolls for the First General Election of the Members of Gram
Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti or Zilla Parishad from that constituency". B
Sub-rule (5) says that "the electoral rolls for the First General Eelection
for each constitutency of the Panchayat shall be prepared by the electoral
Registration Officer". Sub-rule (6) provides that "for the purpose of prepar-
ing the electoral rolls of each constituency for the First General Election
to Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti or Zilla Parishad, the electoral rolls C
of any Assembly constituency, or as the case may be, Assembly constituen-
cies shall be split up in such manner as the Electoral Registration Officer
may consider fit, proper and necessary". Sub-rule (7) provides that "elec-
toral rolls for the First General Election of each constituency of the Oram
Panchayat, Panch;i.yat Samiti or Zilla Parishad may be divided into con-
venient parts which shall be numbered recording (according)? to the D
number of constituencies given as per the delimitation of constituency of
Panchayats". The other sub-rules provide for publication of draft rules,
consideration of objections and claims received and the final publication.
(We have quoted sub-rules (3), (4) (5), (6) and (7) in full because of the
fact that the said rules have been struck down by the High Court). E

The State has preferred the appeal (Special Leave Petition No. 22702
of 1994) aggrieved by the striking down of the Rules aforementioned
whiereas the writ petitioner, Ratanlal Nath, has filed the appeal (Special
Leave Petition (C) No. 10413 of 1994) contending that not only the F
aforesaid Rules but another set of Rules called the Tripura Panchatays
(Constitution of State Panchayat Election Commission) Rules, 1993
(hereinafter referred to as "Election Commission Rules" should also have
been struck down. The Election Commission Rules provide for the con-
stitution of election commission (Rule 3). The rule inter alia provides that
the Governor shall appoint the State Eelction Commissioner on the recom- G
mendation of the State Government and further that "the State Election
Commissioner shall hold office for a period not exceeding six.months at a
time from the date .on which he enters upon his office. Provided that the
Governor may reappoint the same Officer for another term with the
recommendation of the State Government if he is otherwise not dis- H
484 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.

A qualified for re-appointment".

PART - II

So far as Panchayats Rules and Delimitation Rules are c;oncerned,
the only ground urged by the writ petitioner is that the said Rules travel
B
beyond the four corners of the Act and are, therefore, incompetent and
invalid. No other ground of invalidity is urged.

Let us first deal with the Delimitation Rules. The contention of the
writ petitioner is that the provisions contained in proviso (ii) to sub-rule
C (3) Rule 3 are inconsistent with the definition of the expression "popula-
tion" in clause (32) of Section 2 of the Panchayats Act as well as the
definition of the said expression in clause (f) of Article 243 of the Contitu-
tion and, therefore, incompetent. The reasoning which has appealed to the
High Court is that inasmuch as the definition of "population" contained in
D the Constitution as well as in the Act means "the population as ascertained
at the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been
published", the second proviso to sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 which provides
for looking into some other records in the absence of census figures is
outside the purview of the Act and the Constitution. We are unable to
agree. Clause (f) of Article 243 of the Constitution defines the expression
E "Population" in the following words : "(f) Population means the population (
as ascertained at the last preceding census of which the relevant figures
have been published". (Clause (32) of Section 2 of the Tripura Panchayats
Act faithfully re-produces the said definition.) All that the first and second
provisos to sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 of the Delimitation Rules provide is that
F where census figures are available that shall be the primary basis - indeed,
it shall be the only basis - for determining the total population of a
Panchayat, or for that matter, the population of the Scheduled Tribes and
Scheduled Castes, as the case may be, but where the census figures arc not
available, the population figures shall be ascertained from the other
relevant authenticated record. Similar provisions are contained in Rule 6
G and Rule 8 relating to Panchayat Samities and Zilla Parishads respectively.
The provisos do not say that eve11 where the census figures are available,
the authorities should go to other record .. The provisos really provide for
a situation where census figures are not available. The Rules are inspired
by the objective that elections have to be held and it is with this objective
H that they have made the said provision. We are unable to see how the said
RATANLALNATIIv. STATE [B.P.JEEVANREDDY,J.] 485

provisos can be held to travel outside the purview of the Act. The Rules A
are made for carrying out the purposes of the enactment (Section 228(1)
of the Act) and the purpose of the Act is to ensure the conduct the
elections. Indeed, Part-IX of the Constitution was amended in 1973 to
ensure periodic and regular elections to Panchayats, which were not being
held regularly in many States. Not only the said provisos are not inconsis- B
.tent with the provisions of the Act and the Constitution, but they in fact
further and advance the object underlying the Act and Part-IX of the
Constitution. We must say that we find no proper or acceptable reasoning
in the impugned judgment for striking down the said Rules.

We shalll now consider the validity of sub-rules (3) to (7) of Rules C
8-A of the Tripura Panchayats (Preparation of Electoral Rolls) Rules,
1993. The said sub-rules have already been set out in their entirety herein-
before. The contention of the writ petitioner is that these sub-rules are
inconsistent with Section 176, 177 and 183 of the Act. The High Court has
accepted the said plea in two short paragraphs which are, if we may say so D ,
with respect, devoid of any reasoning. In Para 39, they noticed the
provisions in Section 176, 177 and 183. (Section 176 vests the superinten-
dence, direction and control of the ·preparation of the electoral rolls and
conduct of elections under the Act in the State Panchayat Election Com-
mission and provides for the appointment and other matters concerning E
the members of the Commission and other officers. Section 177 provides
that the electoral roll for each constituency "shall be prepared in accord-
ance with the provisions of this Act and the mies made thereunder" and
Section 183 provides that the electoral roll for each constituency shall be
prepared by the Electoral Registration Officer in the prescribed manner
with reference to the qualifying date and that the electoral roll may be F
divided into convenient parts. It also provides for the revison of the
electoral rolls.) Having set out the purport of Section 176, 177 and 183, the
High Court observed :

''.In view of the provisions contained in Sections 176, 177 and 183, G
according to the learned counsel, the amendment of Rule BA is
ultra vire~ inasmuch as it is contrary to the said Sections. As per
the provisions of the said sections preparation of electctoral rolls
cannot be synonymous with the adoption of any electoral roll in
view of the fact that the two concepts are widely different and H
t

486 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 2 S.C.R.

A opposed to each other.

We have perused the provisions of Sections176, 177 and 183
and the amended Rule 8A. On perusal of the Rule we find that
the amended Rule 8A/ (3) to (7) is contrary to the provisions of
the said Sections of the Act. It is well established that a rule making
B authority has no power to make rules contrary to the provisions -of
the Act. Therefore, in our view amendment of Rule 8 by the
Amendment Rules, 1993 is contrary to the provisions of the Act
and, therefore, it is ultra vires ."
-
C Except saying that "preparation of electoral rolls cannot be
synonymous with the adoption of any electoral roll in view of the fact that
the two concepts are widely different and opposed to each other", no other
reason is given for invalidating the said sub-rules. Even the reasoning given
does not appear to be clear or cogent. Statutory rules could not have been
D struck down on such ambiguous reasoning. Sub-rules (3) and (4), which
have been struck down, say that the relevant portion of the electoral rolls
of the Assembly constitutency shall be the electoral rolls for the Gram
·-
Panchayat/Panchayat Samiti/Zilla Parishad, whereas sub-rules (5), (6) and
(7) · which too have been struck down · deal with and provide for the
' .
"First General Eelction". These sub-rules too provide that the electoral
E rolls of· the Assembly constituency shall be split up appropriately for the
purpose of the First General Election in respect of Gram Panchayat,
Panchayat Samiti and Zilla Parishad, as the case may be. These are treated
as draft electoral rolls and are published as such. After receipt of objec-
tions/claims, if any, final electoral rolls are published. Thus, these sub-rules
F are not· only not inconsistent with Sections 176, 177 and 183, they are
indeed made pursuant to the said sections and are meant to carry out the
purposes<of the enactment as a whole.

For the above reasons, we set aside the judgment of the High Court
G declaring proviso (ii) to sub-rule (3) of Rule, 3, proviso (ii) to sub-rule (4)
of Rule 6 and proviso (ii) to clause (c) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 8 of the
Tripura Panchayats (Delimitation of Constituencies). Rules, 1993 and sub-
rules (3) to (7) of Rule ~-A of the Tripura Panchayats (Preparation of
Electoral Rolls) Rules, 1993 as ultra vires the Constitution of India and
Tripura Panchayats Act. We declare the said provisions to be perfectly
H valid and effective.
RATANLALNATHv. STATE[B.P.JEEVANREDDY,J.] 487

The civil appeal preferred by the State is accordingly allowed with A
costs. The appellant's costs are estimated at Rs. 10,000 consolidated.

-- Now coming to the appeal (arising·from Special Leave Petition (C)
No. 10413 of (1994) preferred by the writ petitioner, the .only contention
advanced is that the Constitution and the Act contemplate the State
Election Commissioner to be an independent authority, not subject to the B
control of the State government, whereas sub-rule (3) of Rules 3 of the
Tripura Panchayats (Constitution of State Panchayat Election Commis-
sion) Rules, 1993 provides that the tenure of the said Election Commis-
sioner shall be for a period not exceeding six months at a time providing
at the same time for reappointment and that such a provision deteracts C
from and militates against the concept of independence of such authority.
The contention of Sri J aideep Gupta, learned counsel for the writ
petitioner, is that the State Election Commissioner is akin to the Chief
Election Commission under the Constitution and that the appointment of
the State Election Commissioner should also be on a permanent basis just
as in the case of Chief Election Commissioner. Limiting his tenure to a D
period not exceeding six months and at the same time providing for a
reappointment diminishes and affects its independence, it is submitted. We
are unable to agree. Be that as it may, it is not suggested( that the elections•
conducted by the State Election Commissioner were not properly con-
ducted or that the elections are void on account of the said limitation of E
his tenure. The contention, in our opinion, is untenable and has rightly been
rejected by the High Court.

- We may clarify that we have dealt with only the questions relating to
the validity of the Rules in this judgment. We ,declined to go into· the
validity or correctness of the proceedings taken or acts done under those F
Rules, since those are matters outside the purview of the writ petition,
(SeeA~ugrah Narian Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (1996) 8 J.T. 733 S.C.).

- H.K.
Accordingly, the appeal preferred by the writ petitioner, Sri Ratanlal
Nath, is dismissed. No costs.

· State's Appeal allowed.
G

Appeal of Writ Petitioner.
Appellant dismiii~ed.