Ext.P4, an order passed by the 2nd respondent exercising its power under Sec.4 of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999 declaring that the petitioner herein shall cease to be a member of the Mogral Puthur Grama Panchayat from 29.2007 onwards and is disqualified from contesting as a candidate in the election to the local bodies for a period of six years from 29.2007 onwards, is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. The petitioner contested election as an Indian Union Muslim League candidate and was elected as a member of the Mogral Puthur Grama Panchayat. He was also elected as the President of the said Panchayat in September 2005. There were 14 members in he Panchayat and 7 of them belonged to the Muslim League, 5 belonged to the BJP, 1 to Congress and 1 to Indian National League.

3. It is statedthat by Ext.P3 dated 30.6.2006 produced before the State Election Commission in OP 44/2006, the Kasargode District Secretary of the Muslim League directed the petitioner to resign from the Presidentship of the Panchayat. He disobeyed that direction and continued as President. Subsequently, a No Confidence Motion was moved by his own party colleagues against him and despite the whip for being present in the meeting and to vote in support of the No Confidence Motion, petitioner remained absent in the meeting held on 30.8.2006. In the meeting all the 6 Muslim League members supported the No Confidence Motion, but the No Confidence Motion was defeated with the support of the BJP and INL members.

4. The petitioner continued as the President of the Panchayat and thereupon the 1st respondent herein filed Ext.P1 petition before the 2nd respondent contending that the petitioner had disobeyed the whip and had voluntarily given up his membership in his political party and therefore was disqualified under sec.3(1)(a) of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999. The petition was registered as O.P. 44/2006 and notices were issued. Petitioner entered appearance and filed his written statement (Ext.P2). Evidence, both oral and documentary, was tendered by both sides and finally the 2nd respondent by Ext.P4 order declared that the petitioner shall cease to be a member of the Panchayat from 29.2007 onwards and held him to be disqualified from contesting as a candidate in the election for a period of six years from the aforesaid date. It is challenging this order, the writ petition has been filed.

5. A reading of Ext.P4 order shows that the allegation that the petitioner had disobeyed the whip and had absented in the meeting held on 30.8.2006 to discuss the No Confidence Motion has been found in his favour. His disqualification is only on the conclusion that he had voluntarily given up his membership of Indian Union Muslim League, the party to which he belonged.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contends that the finding in Ext.P4 order of the 2nd respondent that the petitioner had voluntarily given up his membership in the party is erroneous. It is contended that the direction issued by the District Secretary of the Muslim League did not have the support of either the parliamentary party or the State Leadership. It is stated that pointing out the illegalities in the direction issued to him to resign the Presidentship, the petitioner had filed Ext.P3 appeal before the State President of the Muslim League and that the appeal was still pending. Referring to Ext.P3, learned counsel submits that in the appeal, the petitioner has, in very clear terms, expressed his desire to continue as a humble worker of the Muslim League and requested that he be allowed to complete his full tenure as the President of the Panchayat. He would therefore submit that Ext.P3 issued at the instigation of the 1st respondent, was invalid and that at any rate, in view of the pendency of the appeal, he could not have been held to have voluntarily given up his membership of his political party.

.7. Learned c