2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 53911
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY TH MONDAY, THE 13 DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1944 WA NO. 660 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 8714/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 23.3.2022 APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
SINDHU ANILKUMAR, AGED 46 YEARS, W/O. ANIL KUMAR, MAKAL HOUSE, MARUTHAYOOR P.O, PAVARATTI, THRISSUR 680 507.
BY ADVS.RENJITH B.MARAR LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL ARUN POOMULLI AISWARYA THANKACHAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 ELECTION COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE COMPLEX, LMS JUNCTION, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003.
2 VIMALA SETHUMADHAVAN, W/O. SETHUMADHAVAN, THEMATH HOUSE, PUVATHOOR P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT 695 561.
BY ADV SHRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN, SC, STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, KERALA SRI.M.SREEKUMAR, R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 13th day of June 2022 Shaji P. Chaly, J.
The appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.8714/2022 challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 23.3.2022 whereby, the writ petition was dismissed declining the following reliefs sought for by the writ petitioner:
“(i) issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or such other direction calling for the records leading upto Ext.P7 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same;
(ii) declare that the O.P.No.14/2021 filed by the respondents herein before the State Election Commission, Thiruvananthapuram is non-maintainable in law and on facts.”
2. Brief material facts as discernible from the writ petition for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:
Appellant was elected as an independent candidate from Ward No.1 of Pavaratti Grama Panchayat, Thrissur district. The second respondent was elected as a member of the Pavaratti Grama Panchayat from Ward No.7 in the ticket of Indian National Congress (INC). The second respondent filed O.P.No.14/2021 before the State Election Commission praying that the appellant be disqualified from membership on account of an alleged defection. It is stated in the petition before the State Election Commission that the appellant is an independent member belonging to the Indian National Congress (INC). On 30.12.2020, the election to the post of the Vice President of the Pavaratty Grama Panchayat was scheduled and the appellant was present for the meeting. In the petition, it is alleged that there was a party whip from the office of the District Committee, INC on 28.12.2020 calling upon all the members of the party to be present for the meeting and to vote for the candidate namely, Jerome Babu for the post of Vice President. In the meeting on 30.12.2020, 11 members were present for the voting. The INC candidate lost the election for Vice President by securing only 4 votes, whereas the Left Democratic Front (LDF) candidate one Rejina.M.M. won the election by securing 6 votes. The vote that was cast by the appellant was disqualified as there was a defect in the manner in which the ballot was marked by the appellant. The second respondent in the petition has alleged that the above incident is an instance of defection as the appellant being an INC candidate had defied the party whip. It was accordingly that the petition was filed before the State Election Commission seeking to disqualify the membership of the appellant. Apart from filing objections in the Original Petition, the appellant has filed I.A.No.26/2021 in O.P.No.14/2021 challenging the maintainability of the Original Petition before the State Election Commission. However, the said application was dismissed by the State Election Commission, as per Ext.P7 order dated 18th November 2021, holding that the subject issues raised by the appellant in the interlocutory application can be adjudicated only after taking evidence and conducting full trial of the case. It is thus challenging the legality and the correctness of the order passed by the State Election Commission in the interlocutory application, the writ petition was filed.
3. The learned Single Judge, after considering the rival contentions raised by the parties, upheld the order passed by the State Election Commission holding that the State Election Commission has exercised the power in accordance with law and that since the appellant has admitted that he is an independent candidate supported by the INC, the contentions raised by the appellant assailing the interim order cannot be sustained under law. The legality and correctness of the judgment of the learned Single Judge is challenged in this appeal basically contending that the learned Single Judge has failed to note that the Original Petition before the State Election Commission is not maintainable under law since the appellant was an independent candidate and that he has not received any whip from the District President of the Indian National Congress. It is f