A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

1. In all these writ petitions the common order dated 13.10.2017 of the Election Commission in O.P. No. 79 of 2015, O.P. No. 80 of 2015 and O.P. No. 81 of 2015 are impugned. These matters pertain to an election to the Mallappuzhahassery Grama Panchayath, where, to the 13 seats to which election was held in November 2015, the United Democratic Front (UDF) won five seats, the Left Democratic Front (LDF) four seats, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) three seats and an Independent one seat. The components of the UDF, which won the five seats, comprised of the Congress, which won three seats, Janada Dal (U) one seat and Kerala Congress one seat. Similarly, under the LDF, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) CPI (M) won three seats and the Communist Party of India (CPI) one seat. The elected members, then proceeded to hold the election to the post of President on 19.11.2015. It is not in dispute that there was no whip issued either by the UDF or by the JD (U). The petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 33329 of 2017 is a person, who contested as a member of the JD (U), which formed part of the UDF coalition that was formed for the purposes of contesting the election. It is stated that, while the UDF coalition fielded the 2nd respondent, who was a Congress candidate, as the candidate for the post of President, the petitioner also contested to the post of President and was subsequently elected based on the votes garnered in the election from the LDF Councillors, who voted in favour of the petitioner. One Congress candidate abstained from the election meeting and the Kerala Congress candidate voted in favour of the petitioner. As already noted, consequent to the petitioner being elected as a President, the election of the President was challenged by the 2nd respondent, who also sought disqualification of the petitioner along with the Congress Councillor who abstained from voting, as also the Kerala Congress candidate who voted in favour of the petitioner. The election petitions came to be numbered as O.P. No. 79 of 2015, O.P. No. 80 of 2015 and O.P. No. 81 of 2015 respectively. Through a common order dated 13.10.2017, the Election Commission found with regard to the Congress Councillor (O.P. No. 81 of 2015) that the said person had not complied with the whip issued by his party and had not attended the election meeting. The justification given by the said person, that he was prevented from attending the Election Meeting on account of an injury sustained by him, was disbelieved based on the evidence adduced, and the said person was held disqualified as a Councillor. In W.P. (C) No. 33330 of 2017, the said decision of the Election Commission is impugned by the Congress candidate concerned, who is the petitioner in the said writ petition. As regards the Kerala Congress Councillor, the Election Commission found, in the context of O.P. No. 80 of 2015, that the said person had violated the directions in a whip issued by the party, and although the councillor had set up a defence that she had received oral directions to the effect that she was to vote for the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 33329 of 2017, the said version was not believed, based on the evidence adduced before the Election Commission. The said Councillor was also, therefore, disqualified and the order of disqualification is impugned in W.P. (C) No. 33299 of 2017 filed by the said person. As regards the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 33329 of 2017, the Election Commission found in the context of O.P. No. 79 of 2015 that, although the JD (U) party had not issued any whip or direction that was disobeyed by the petitioner, his contesting the election for the post of President, against an understanding of the coalition, of which his party was an integral part, and further, his emerging successful in the election on the basis of a sponsorship by the opposite party, effectively meant that he had voluntarily given up the membership of his party, and therefore, stood dis