IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6914 of 2008 Shyam Babu Yadav @ Mallu Yadav, aged about 46 years, son of Sri Mittal Yadav, resident of Mohalla- South Mandiri, P.S. Budha Colony within town and District- Patna……………………………………………………………………………………….Petitioner . Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The State Election Commission, through the Commissioner, Sone Bhawan IIIrd Floor, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna. 3. The State Election Commissioner, Bihar, Sone Bhawan, IIIrd Floor, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate-cum- District Election Officer(Nagarpalika), Patna. 5. Shri Mithilesh Kumar Sinha, son of Sri Lakshmi Narayan Yadav, South Mandiri, G.P.O., Patna……………………………………………………………………………Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Shailendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For the State Election Commission: M/S. K.B.Nath & Sanjeev Nikesh, Advocates. For the State: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, A.C. to A.A.G.6. ----------- 2. 11.07.2011. Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, State Election Commission and the State. The petitioner has filed this writ application for quashing the order dated 16.04.2008 as contained in Annexure-2 passed by the State Election Commission, respondent no. 3, whereby respondent no. 3 has disqualified the petitioner to hold the post of Ward Councilor of the Patna Municipal Corporation and declared the post vacant and also directed for filling up of the said post in accordance with law. It appears from the impugned order, 2 Annexure-2, that the petitioner was convicted in Kotwali P.S. Case No. 411(5) of 1982 for two years hence, the power under Section 18(1)(g) of the Bihar Municipal Act has been exercised for passing the impugned order. It is submitted by Mr. Shailendra Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed Cr. Appeal No. 152 of 1988 against the order of conviction in which the petitioner is on bail. Hence, the petitioner can not be disqualified by resorting to by provisions of Section 18(1)(g) of the Bihar Municipal Act since criminal appeal of the petitioner against conviction is pending after being admitted. Section 18(1)(g)of Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 reads as follows: “ Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, a person shall be disqualified for election or after election for holding the post as member of the Municipality if such person has been sentenced by a Criminal Court, whether within or without India, to imprisonment for an offence other than a political offence, for a term exceeding six 3 months or has been ordered to furnish security for keeping good behaviour under Section 109 or Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (Act 2,1974) and such sentence or order not having subsequently been reversed; or absconding being an accused in a criminal case for more than six months.” Hence, power under Section 18(1)(g) of Bihar Municipal Act can be exercised when any person is convicted for a term exceeding six months and such order of conviction has not been subsequently reversed. In the present writ application, conviction is admitted and the appeal is also still pending. Hence, this contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner has no substance. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the election petition is also pending filed by respondent no. 5. In view of this court, the provisions of Section 18(1)(g) of Bihar Municipal Act does not preclude the exercise of power due to pendency of criminal appeal or writ application. This court finds no merit in the 4 writ application, hence, the writ application is dismissed. U. K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)