Common questions of fact and law arise for consideration in this batch of writ petitions.

Hence, they are disposed of, through common judgment.

2. The Andhra Pradesh State Legislative Council was revived, in the recent past. Steps were initiated, to elect the members in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Constitution of India; the Representation of the People Act 1950 (for short ‘1950 Act’), and that of 1951 (for short 1951 Act). Section 6 of the 1951 Act mandates that a person shall be eligible to be chosen to fill a seat in the Legislative Council, if only he is an elector for any Assembly Constituency in the State.

3. The common case of the petitioners is that their names were included in the respective Legislative Assembly Constituencies upto the year 2003 and in the subsequent revisions, their names were deleted. All of them submitted applications to the respective Registering Authorities for inclusion of their names. In some cases, the applications were acted upon and the names of the applicants were included by the Registering Authorities, and in other cases, the petitioners approached this Court, by filing writ petitions. In such cases also, the names came to be included.

4. All the petitioners intended to file their nominations for being elected in different constituencies of the Legislative Council. The Election Commission of India issued a circular dated 15-02-2007, directing that the voters lists of the assembly constituencies, published in the year 2006, shall constitute the basis, and directed postponement of the on-going revision of the said lists, for the year 2007. Apprehending that their nominations may not be received, on the ground that their names did not find place in the voters lists of 2006, in the respective assembly constituencies, the petitioners filed these writ petitions. In some of them, the instructions, issued by the Election Commission and the consequential communication issued by the State Election Authority, are challenged, and in some cases, mere declaration, as to their eligibility to file nominations; sought.

5. Petitioners contend that for no cause attributable to them, their names were deleted in the year 2006, and their applications filed under Section 21 of the 1950 Act were acted upon by the respective Registering Authorities, and that their names came to be included, at the relevant places. They contend that once their names are included, as per the provisions of the 1950 Act, their right to file nominations cannot be taken away.

6. The Election Commission of India, and the State Election Commission have tiled separate counter affidavits. In some of the matters, the respective Returning Officers have also filed counter affidavits. The gist of their contention is that, the basis for verification of the eligibility of the candidates, is the voters lists of the year 2006, of any assembly constituency, and the inclusions made after the date of publication of the lists, do not confer any right on the petitioners. It is stated that the applications made by the petitioners are traceable to the on-going revision of the voters lists of assembly constituencies in the year 2007, and in view of the change of schedule, the final publication would take place only in March, 2007; much subsequent to the last date for filing of nominations for the Legislative Council. They have also raised a preliminary objection, as to the maintainability of the writ petitions, inasmuch as the election process has already been commenced.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners urge that the stand taken by the respondents is contrary to the provisions of the Acts 1950 and 1951. They contend that Section 23 of the 1950 Act does not make any reference to publication, in the context of inclusion of names, and that the act of publication is only ministerial in nature. They placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in P. T. Rajan v. T.P.M. Sahir and others. As regards the preliminary objection rai