SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 807

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J.
C.K. Aravindakshan, S/o. Late v. Kelu - appellant 
Versus 
The State Co-Operative Election Commission - Respondents 
WP(C) NO. 12803 OF 2025 
Decided on : 07-04-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : NISHA GEORGE GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.), ANSHIN K.K
For the Respondents: ADV. M.SASINDRAN

IMPORTANT POINT
The court cannot interfere with the statutory authority's decision on polling venue, as it is a factual matter within their jurisdiction.

Headnote:

(A) Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 - Rule 35A(1) - Election management - The Part-time Administrator fixed the polling station for the Society's election at Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara, on 10.05.2025, despite the petitioner's request for Govt. U.P. School, Pullur, citing accessibility concerns. The court found that the Administrator's decision was based on the convenience of voters and the suitability of the venue, dismissing the petitioner's claims of electoral fraud and bias. (Paras 1 - 5 )

(B) Jurisdiction of Court - The court held that it cannot interfere with the decisions of statutory authorities regarding election venues, as these are factual matters within their jurisdiction. (Paras 5 - 6 )

Facts of the case:

The petitioner challenged the election notification, arguing that the new polling station was less accessible and prone to electoral fraud, while the Administrator defended the choice based on logistical considerations.

Findings of Court:

The court upheld the Administrator's decision, emphasizing the importance of convenience and suitability in polling station selection.

Issues: The main issues were the appropriateness of the polling venue and the court's jurisdiction to review the Administrator's decision.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the choice of polling venue is a factual matter for statutory authorities, and the court should not interfere unless there is clear evidence of illegality or irrationality.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner is a member of the 4th respondent Society. Presently, the 3rd respondent, the Part-time Administrator is managing the affairs of the Society and there is no elected Managing Committee in the Society. The 3rd respondent vide Ext.P3, took a decision to conduct the election to the Managing Committee of the 4th respondent Society on 10.05.2025 fixing the polling station at Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara. The resolution was forwarded to the State Co-operative Election Commission, the 1st respondent as required under Rule 35A(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 (for short, ‘KCS Rules’). The 1st respondent, as per Ext.P6, notified the election to the Managing Committee of the Society scheduling the polling on 10.05.2025 and fixing the venue of polling at Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara. It is submitted that the Part-time Administrator has fixed the polling station ignoring Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioner requesting to fix the venue of Election at Govt. U.P. School, Pullur as it is easily accessible to the voters. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P6 election notification to the extent of fixing the polling station at Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara and to direct the 3rd respondent to adopt resolution to fix the polling station at Govt. U.P. School, Pullur.

2. It is submitted by the petitioner that the elections to the Managing Committee of the Society was held at Govt. U.P. School, Pullur for the last more than 30 years. It is stated that the Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara is situated more than 7 Kilometers away from the Head Office of the Society and located in the boarder of the area of operation of the Society. The Govt. U.P. School, Pullur is easily accessible and more convenient to the voters to cast their vote. It is also stated that the Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara is situated near to ‘Kalliyoottu’ which is an area prone to political violence. It is stated that the venue has been shifted to Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara, to facilitate bogus voting and electoral fraud. It is further stated that the Part-time Administrator is acting to the whims and fancies of political masters in fixing the polling station.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent, the Part-time Administrator wherein it is stated that there are 5600 members and the Govt. U.P. School, Pullur is not convenient to conduct a proper and convenient election. The Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara is having large area, buildings and premises, for which it is convenient to conduct election, for members above 5000. It is further stated that the election was conducted at the U.P. School, Pullur, when the number of members was low. It is further stated that the Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara is situated within the area of operation of the Society and is suitable to the voters. It is further stated that there are vehicular traffic facilities from all parts of the area of operation of the Society to the polling station. It is also stated that students from all parts of the area are studying in the Govt. Vocational Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara. It is further stated that the local Police Station is located just within 150 meters from the Govt. Higher Secondary School, Ambalathara. It is also stated that the apprehension of the petitioner with regard to electoral fraud are without any basis. It is stated that the election will be conducted with Police Assistance.

4. Heard Sri. George Poonthottam, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri. Anshin K.K, for the petitioner, Sri. M. Sasindran, the learned Counsel for the 3rd respondent, Sri. C. M. Nazar, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

5. As per the provisions contained under Rule 35A(1) of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top