JUDGMENT

A.J. Desai, C.J.

In the present writ appeal filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Court, the judgment, by which the learned Single Judge held that the 2nd respondent/appellant to be disqualified from being a member of the Thodupuzha Municipality on the ground of having withdrawn from the coalition, is under challenge.

2. The short facts arising for consideration are as follows;

The appellant contested the election to Ward No.9 of Thodupuzha Municipality held on 08/12/2020. She filled up her nomination paper under Rule 6 of the Kerala Municipality (Conduct of Elections) Rules,1995 and declared certain facts. In the said nomination paper under serial No.10-'name of the political party if the candidate is affiliated with any party', she has stated that she is contesting the election as an independent candidate with the support of a political party viz. Indian Union Muslim League. She also filled up the detailed information in Form No.2A under Rule 6(2)(a), again declaring that she is contesting as an independent candidate with the support of the Indian Union Muslim League. Subsequent to her election, the appellant filled up her declaration in Form 2 under Rule 3(2) of the Kerala Local Authorities (Disqualification of Defected Members) Rules, 2000. Therein also she declared that she contested the election with the symbol 'Umbrella' as an independent candidate supported by the Indian Union Muslim League. Thodupuzha Municipality has maintained a Register in which it is mentioned that the appellant had contested the election for Ward No.9 under the symbol of 'Umbrella' and having alliance of Indian Union Muslim League.

Thereafter, the appellant contested the election of Vice Chairperson of the Municipality with the support of parties opposed to the Indian Union Muslim League and won the election. The aforesaid election was challenged by another elected member of the Municipality before the Election Commission on various grounds, including the applicability of the provisions of Rule 3(2) (a) of the Kerala Local Authorities (Disqualification of Defected Members) Rules, 2000 particularly relying upon the Explanation thereto. It was the case of the appellant before the Election Commission that incorrect entries were made in the Register maintained by the Municipality. The Election Commission examined several witnesses and dismissed the election petition. The same was challenged by the complainant by filing the writ petition. The learned Single Judge, after examining the materials produced before the Court, allowed the writ petition and declared that having withdrawn from the coalition, the appellant herein had become disqualified from contesting as a member of the Thodupuzha Municipality. Hence, this writ appeal.

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant firmly submitted that the learned Single Judge has committed error in allowing the writ petition. Learned Counsel would submit that there was no reason for the learned Single Judge to overcome the findings of the Election Commission as there was no breach of the provisions of Section 3 of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act 1999 ('the Act' for short). He would further submit that apart from the above fact, the learned Single Judge has committed error in not accepting the case of the appellant regarding the genuineness of the entries made in the Register maintained by the Municipality. Moreover, the appellant having contested the election as an independent candidate, she can have the support of any other party and therefore the judgment impugned is liable to be set aside.

4. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondent/original petitioner would submit that the case is thoroughly covered under the provisions of the Act. Learned Counsel has taken us through the nomination and declaration forms filled up and signed by the appellant to make it clear that the appellant had contested and won the election with the support of