1. Elected to the Akalakunnam Grama Panchayat to be its member from Ward No.5, the petitioner became the convener of the Grama Sabha of that constituency in terms of Section 3(4) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, for short, the "Act". The first meeting of the Grama Sabha was held on 28.1.2006. The second meeting scheduled to be held on 20.8.2006 was adjourned for want of quorum and was held on 27.8.2006.

2. The 2nd respondent filed a petition before the Kerala State Election Commission alleging that though the Panchayat was constituted on 2.10.2005, the first and second meetings of the Grama Sabha for Ward No.5 were convened by the petitioner only on 28.1.2006 and 28.7.2006 respectively and hence, having failed, twice consecutively, to convene meetings of the Grama Sabha, due once in three months, she has incurred the disqualification in terms of Section 35 (p) of the Act.

3. The Writ petitioner denied the allegations against her and contended that she was not able to convene the Grama Sabha in time as the President of the Panchayat had not fixed and communicated to her the date and time for convening the meeting. She pleaded that as per Rule 4 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Procedure for Convening and Conducting the Meeting of Grama Sabha) Rules, 1995, for short, the "Meeting Rules", the President of the Panchayat shall, after consultation with the Grama Sabha Convener, fix the date, time and venue of the Grama Sabha and that it is up to the Secretary of the Panchayat to make arrangements to conduct the Grama Sabha after due publicity. She also contended that she had made all arrangements to convene the Grama Sabha and that the first meeting of the Panchayat was held on 14.10.2005, after the election of the President of the Panchayat on 2.10.2005. It is also pleaded that the Panchayat Committee was convened on 12.1.2006 to fix various dates for Grama Sabha meetings and the meeting of the Grama Sabha, of which the petitioner is the Convener, was fixed to be held on 28.1.2006. According to her, after that meeting on 28.1.2006, another meeting of the Grama Sabha was scheduled on 20.8.2006 and that was adjourned for want of quorum and was held on 27.8.2006. She also pleaded that the President of the Panchayat was able to schedule the second meeting of the Grama Sabha only on 20.8.2006 due to the General Elections fixed on 12.5.2006. She contended that there was no failure or lapse in convening the meeting within the stipulated time.

4. Ext.P7 order was passed by the Commission disqualifying the petitioner under Section 36 read with Section 35(p) of the Act. That is under challenge.

5. This writ petition and W.P©. 37968/07 were earlier considered and the decision of the Commission was quashed as per judgment dated 15.7.2008, reported as Varghese yohannan v. Kerala State Election Commission [2008(3) KLT 468]. That judgment was reviewed at the instance of the Commission as per the order reported as Kerala State Election Commission v. Mercy George [2008(3) KLT 83]. This writ petition is accordingly listed for hearing. This Court initially held that the provisions in Sections 3(3) and 35(p) of the Act, as they stand, are incongruous in as much as Section 3(3) does not prescribe any particular interval for the meetings, though the prescription of disqualification in Section 35(p) is as if there is one such. This Court, therefore, noticed that the penalty of disqualification imposed as per Section 35(p) is provided as a consequence of a non-existent obligation. It was held that in view of the amendment of Section 3(3), the petitioner cannot be disqualified under Section 35(p). It was also noticed that Rule 4 of the Meeting Rules shows that it is inconsistent with the provisions of Section 3(3) of the Act. Resultantly, the impugned order was quashed. The Commission's application for review of that judgment was allowed on account of the fact that the Malayalam version of the amended Section 3(3) was not brought to the notice