S.Manikumar, J.

Dr.E.Muralidharan, a Consultant Environmental and Biomedical Engineer, has filed the instant writ petition for a mandamus, directing the Election Commission of India, represented by its Secretary, New Delhi, to display the contesting candidates photograph, educational qualification, profession, assets, and criminal cases in addition to the existing details displayed outside the polling stations immediately, after the finalization of qualified candidates of all parliamentary and legislative elections.

2. Supporting the prayer sought for Mr.K.Sakthivel, learned counsel for the petitioner, referred to Rule 31 of the Conduct of Election Rules 1961, which reads thus.

31. Arrangements at polling stations.

1. Outside each polling station there shall be displayed prominently

(a). A notice specifying the polling area the electors of which are entitled to vote at the polling station and, when the polling area has more than one polling station, the particulars of the electors so entitled; and

(b). A copy of the list of contesting candidates.

2. At each polling station, there shall be set up one or more voting compartments in which electors can record their votes screened from observation.

3. The returning officer shall provide at each polling station a sufficient number of ballot boxes, copies of the relevant part of the electoral roll, ballot papers, instruments for stamping the distinguishing mark on ballot papers and articles, necessary for electors to mark the ballot papers.

3. Petitioner has further submitted that earlier, the petitioner filed W.P.No.12211 of 2016, before this Court, seeking for a direction to the Election Commission of India, to display, in all the polling stations in respect of all the information of the candidates contesting in the Assembly Elections 2016, by providing the particulars of the candidates, such as, photographs, educational qualifications, profession, properties, both movable and immovable and pending criminal cases, in addition to the existing particulars, provided in public notice of the candidates and this Court, vide order dated 01.04.2016 ordered that it is for the Election Commission to consider how best to carry out the election process.

4. Petitioner has contended that pursuant to the order made in W.P.No.12211 of 2016 dated 01.04.2016, he made a representation dated 02.05.2016 to the respondent seeking for particulars.

5. Responding to the same, a reply dated 14.09.2016, was given stating that full affidavits of the candidates have been uploaded in the website of the concerned Chief Electoral Officer of the State and displayed in the notice board of the Returning Officer and that displaying information on the polling stations, would not serve any useful purpose, as the electors coming to vote, would have already assured of their candidates and made up their minds rather than waiting to access information about candidates after reaching polling station.

6. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) Vs. Union of India, (2003) AIR SC 2363, Mr.K.Sakthivel, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that when the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the voter's right to know about the antecedents of the candidates, contesting election to legislatures, is regarded as a part of the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, which provides that all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, his right has to be construed into the fundamental right, to know the relevant antecedents of the candidates contesting the election.

7. Attention of this Court was also invited to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Krishnamoorthy Vs. Sivakumar and Others, (2015) AIR SC 1921, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court ordered as hereunder.

"If right to telecast and right to view sport games and the right to impart such information is considered to be part and parcel of Article 19(1)(a), w