S. S. M. QUADRI, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the deletion of her name from the list of voters without notice or enquiry as arbitrary and illegal and for a direction to permit the petitioner to exercise her franchise in the election to the Lok Sabha scheduled to take place on 15-6-1991.

( 2 ) THE petitioner claims to be a resident of Kothapalli Village, hamlet of Candlaparthi, Ananthapur District. She says that she was registered as a voter on the basis of 1988 census in both the Assembly Constituency and the Lok Sabha Constituency and that she has been exercising her franchise from the time she became eligible to vote. It is stated that in the final list of voters for the current Parliamentary Elections she was alloted to polling booth No. 174 under 172 Ananthapur Assembly Constituency and her Serial No. in the list was 109. When the election agents distributed slips, they informed that her name was deleted from the voters list. That information was confirmed by the 1st respondent. She obtained a copy of the list of additions and deletions and noticed that her name was deleted from the list attached to Polling Booth No. 174 It is stated that she was not informed of the deletion of her name.

( 3 ) SHE also filed an additional affidavit stating inter alia that under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 (for short "the Rules"), Rule 21-A empowers deletion of names of persons either dead or ceased to be ordinary residents of the place and that power can be exercised only after notice to the particular party. It is stated that the rule is not applicable and even if it is to be invoked, the name cannot be deleted without notice to the affected party. On these facts the petitioner prays for the writ as indicated above.

( 4 ) SRI D. Sudhakara Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that without notice to the petitioner her name was deleted from the voters list, therefore, this Court can issue the writ as prayed for.

( 5 ) THE learned Government Pleader appearihg for the 1st respondent, submits that under the Rules a right of appeal is conferred on the petitioner and she has not exercised that right and approached this Court without exhausting the statutory remedy, therefore the writ is liable to be dismissed.

( 6 ) TO appreciate the contention of the learned counsel, it is necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the said Rules. Rules 10 and 11 deal with the publication of the roll in draft add further publicity of the roll. Rule 12 entitles persons whose names are not included in the draft list to file objections within thirty days from the date of publication of the roll in draft under Rule 10. Rules 13 to 20 deal with the matters relating to the investigation into the claims, rejection or acceptance of the claims, objections and matters relating thereto. Rule 21 empowers the Registration Officer to include the name which were inadvertently omitted. Rule 21-A deals with deletion of names and reads as follows : 21-A. Deletion of names : If it appears to the registration officer at any time before the final publication of the roll that owing to inadvertence or error or otherwise, the names of dead persons or of persons who have ceased to be, or are not, ordinarily residents in the constituency or of persons who are otherwise not entitled to be registered in that roll, have been included in the roll and that remedial action should be taken under this rule, the registration officer, shall, (A) prepare a list of the names and other details of such electors (B) exhibits on the notice board of his office a copy of the list together with a notice as to the time and place at which the question of deletion of these names from the roll will be considered, and also publish the list and the notice in such other manner as he may think fit ; and (C) after considering any verbal or written objections that may be preferred, decide whether all or any of the names should be deleted from the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document