The bar imposed by Article 243-ZG of the Constitution of India is twofold. Validity of laws relating to delimitation and allotment of seats, made under Article 243ZA, cannot be questioned in any Court. No election to a municipality can be questioned except by an election petition. If the election is imminent, or is well under way, the Court should not intervene to stop the election process. If this is allowed to be done, no election will ever take place because someone or the other will always find some excuse to move the court and stall the elections. Ordinarily, after the publication of the notification for holding municipal elections, the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not interfere with the election process, (Anugrah Narain Singh v. State of U.P.[1] ) , more so in view of the specific bar under Article 243ZG(b) of the Constitution of India. (Gurdeep Singh Dhillon v. Satpal[2] ) . From the language of clause (b) of Article 243ZG, it is clear that the bar is absolute. Normally, where a bar is expressed in negative language, it must be held to be mandatory and absolute. As the mode of challenging the election, by way of an election petition, has been prescribed by the Municipalities Act and the Rules made thereunder, election to a Municipal Council cannot, ordinarily, be called in question except by way of an election petition. The bar, to interference by Courts
