Point of Law: power of the Court to examine the reasonableness of an order of the authorities does not enable the Court to look into the sufficiency of the grounds in support of a decision to examine the merits of the decision, sitting as if in appeal over the decision. The test is not what the Court considers reasonable or unreasonable but a decision which the Court thinks that no reasonable person could have taken, which has led to manifest injustice. The writ Court does not interfere, because a decision is not perfect.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the final voters list of Eluru Municipal Corporation, West Godavari District for the ensuing elections, as mandated under Rule 12 of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and contrary to Rules 10 and 12 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to rectify the mistakes crept in the voters list prepared for Eluru Municipal Corporation elections by duly considering the objections raised by the petitioners.

2. The petitioners are the members of Telugu Desam Party. The first petitioner was elected and served as Municipal Councellor, Eluru, the second petitioner is the District Committee Member of the Telugu Desam Party and the third petitioner is the Vice President of the Town Committee. All the petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in preparing the voters list in a hurried manner, giving go-bye to several provisions of law and detrimental to the interest of the public at large, including the petitioners, filed the petition.

3. It is contended that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued Notification vide G.O.Ms.No.240 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (E&R) Department dated 31.12.2019 merging seven villages and later, pursuant to the notification, the third respondent Municipality called for objections and suggestions from the villagers, and later finalized larger area of city of Eluru by exercising power under Section 3 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. In the first week of February, the petitioners party office received the final list and on verification, they were surprised to find several discrepancies, variations, irregularities in the list. On 05.02.2020, the third respondent addressed a letter to all political parties, Tahsildar, Revenue Divisional Officer and District Collector, West Godavari stating that, as per the circular of the State Election Commission dated 31.01.2020, the list of Returning Officers to the 50 divisions is notified and later, sought for objections/suggestions from the petitioners by 07.02.2020 in the meeting to be held in the chambers of the third respondent.

4. The Corporation has been divided under 50 divisions. The enquiry made by the petitioners reveals that in a very callous manner, the voters list is prepared with blatant mistakes which shocks the conscience of any person. The glaring defects are pointed out division wise, basing on the list submitted by the third respondent. It is contended that, as all these illegalities, irregularities or errors are explicit from the record, this Court can interfere by exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and direct the respondents to rectify the mistakes or blatant errors, as pointed out by these petitioners in this petition and they are as follows: