Important points:
A voter or on his behalf any one could contend that at a particular place a polling station should be established in connection with an election to enable him to vote. In respect of Purappeda Santhis essentially, the appointment as Purappeda Santhi in any temple where such a custom is prevailing, will only for a particular period, which is usually a period of one year. Normally, name of such an appointee/selectee as Purappeda Santhi would also be there in the electoral roll prepared for the constituency where he is an ordinarily resident. The conjoint effect of Section 15 of R.P. Act, 1950 and Section 62(1) of R.P. Act, 1951 is that any person whose name is entered in the electoral roll of any constituency would be entitled to vote in that constituency only. How can this Court issue a writ of mandamus for providing a polling station inside a temple premise? As regards a Purappeda Santhi he cannot leave the temple premise during the tenure of his appointment as Purappeda Santhi. Even in the case of such a Santhi who actually belongs to the constituency where the temple concerned situates his right can only be to cast vote in the polling booth concerned provided in the said constituency and not else where.

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

1. The Kshatriya Kshema Sabha claims to be a registered organization (under which enactment? It is not stated in the writ petition) filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i) issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other Writ, Order or Direction to quash Exhibit-P3.

(ii) issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order or Direction commanding and compelling the respondents to provide polling stations to Purappeda Santhis of Sabarimala and Malikappuram temple in the temple premises or provide them postal vote facility for the up coming Lok Sabha elections.

(iii) issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order or Direction commanding and compelling the respondents to make a permanent arrangement to ensure voting facility to the Purappeda Santhis of various temples of the State of Kerala.”

2. Essentially, the grievance projected in the writ petition pertains to the rejection of the request to permit the Melsanthis of Sabarimala and Malikappuram Temples to cast postal vote or to provide them polling stations in the said temple premises by the Chief Electoral Officer. Ext.P3 to that effect came to be passed on a request in writing for the said purpose by the State General Secretary of the petitioner organization. As per Ext.P3, he was informed that postal ballot could be permitted only in the case of officers deputed for polling duty and such request could not be acceded. The petitioner seeks for quashment of Ext.P3 and also for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to provide polling stations solely for the Melsanthis of Sabarimala and Malikappuram Temples at Sabarimala for the upcoming Lok Sabha elections. With respect to the second prayer virtually, it is not now surviving. Obviously, the said election is over. Therefore, the surviving questions in this writ petition are whether Ext.P3 letter invites interference and whether the petitioner is entitled to seek for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to make permanent arrangements to ensure voting facility to the Purappeda Santhis of various temples of the State of Kerala, including Sabarimala and Malikappuram.

3. The first respondent filed a statement taking up the contention that the writ petition is not maintainable. Furthermore, it is stated therein that franchise being an individual's statutory right the petitioner organization cannot maintain a writ petition carrying such prayers. As regards the request for providing polling stations, it is stated that Section 25 of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for brevity R.P. Act only) deals with the issue and as a matter of right, none can seek for establishment of a polling station at any particular place and it is for the authorities concerned to take a decision on the said aspect in accordance with the mandates under the provisions of the R.P. Act. As regards the request for providing postal vote facility to the Purappeda Santhis of various temples in the State of Kerala including Melsanthis of Sabarimala and Malikappuram temples, it is stated that in view of Rule 16 of Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, it is impermissible in law to grant the said relief. Rule 18 thereunder provides the categories of persons who are entitled to vote by post in a parliamentary or assembly election in any constituency. In short, raising such contentions, the first respondent seeks for dismissal of the writ petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Election Commission, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent Travancore Devaswom Board and also the learned Senior Government Pleader.

5. We have already adverted to the reliefs sought for, by the petitioner in the writ petition. It is to be noted that the democratic system in India is based on the principle of universal adult franchise; that any citizen over the age of 18 years can vote in an election. True that the right to vote is not avail