Section 10 of General Clauses Act applies to election petitions where limitation expires during court vacations.

The Petitioner was declared the elected Corporator of Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam (Ward No. 96) on 13.05.2023

Respondent No. 2 challenged this election by filing an Election Petition under Section 62 of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959, on 01.07.2023

The Petitioner filed a written statement contesting the petition as time-barred under Section 62(4), which mandates filing within 30 days of the declaration of results (i.e., by 12.06.2023)

Respondent No. 2 contended that because the District Court was closed for summer vacations from June 1st to June 30th, the petition filed on the reopening day (July 1st) was within time

The Trial Court (Additional District Judge, Court No. 6, Ghaziabad) decided the limitation issue (Issue No. 5) in favor of the Election Petitioner on 31.05.2024

The Petitioner challenged this order via the present writ petition.

Section 62(4) of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959, which prescribes a 30-day limitation for election petitions

Section 10 of the U.P. General Clauses Act, 1904, which provides that if a court is closed on the last day of a prescribed period, the act is considered timely if done on the next day the court is open

Rule 13 and Rule 32 of the General Rules (Civil), 1957, regarding court holidays and the presentation of applications

Precedents H.H. Raja Harinder Singh v. S. Karnail Singh (AIR 1957 SC 271) and Hari Shanker Tripathi v. Shiv Harsh and Others ((1976) 1 SCC 897), which established that Section 10 of the General Clauses Act applies to election petitions when the Limitation Act is excluded

The court reasoned that while the Limitation Act, 1963, does not govern election petitions, Section 10 of the U.P. General Clauses Act, 1904, squarely applies

The court rejected the Petitioner's argument that the petition should have been filed with a ministerial officer (Munsarim) during the vacation, noting that in the absence of a specific notification or rule requiring election petitions to be accepted during holidays, a "closed holiday" for civil work remains a holiday for limitation purposes

Relying on Hari Shanker Tripathi, the court distinguished between the office being open for ministerial work and the court being open for judicial business; since the summer vacation suspended civil work and no specific rule authorized the Registrar or Munsarim to accept election petitions during this period, the presentation on the reopening day was legally valid

The court noted that because the 30-day period expired on 12.06.2023 (during the vacation), the filing on 01.07.2023 was protected by Section 10

Since there was no notification specifically authorizing the intake of election petitions during summer vacations, the petition filed on the next working day was within the limitation period. The writ petition was dismissed, the Trial Court’s order was upheld, and the interim stay on the election petition proceedings was vacated.