A.K.GANGULY, J.

1. Since common questions of law are involved in both these writ petitions, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties in these matters.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners at length, we found that since various questions have been raised in these writ petitions, we ought to dispose of the same by a reasoned order.

4. Learned counsel for the Election Commission of India (Respondent No. 2 herein) has handed over to this Court a copy of the order dated 1/08/1994 passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 151-52 of 1994. We have perused that order carefully. The said order of the Hon ble Supreme Court refers to two petitions, one of which was filed in Calcutta High Court and another in Kerala High Court challenging the notification issued by the Election Commission dated 29/08/1993 and in that context the Hon ble Supreme Court was pleased to observe that if any such petition is filed in any other High Court, it shall, after entertaining the case, transfer it to the Supreme Court.

5. As we are going to dismiss these writ petitions at the threshold and we do not propose to e