Judicial intervention in ongoing electoral processes is limited under relevant laws, emphasizing the judicial restraint necessary to uphold electoral integrity.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside Ext. P2.

2. Declare that the post of President of the 6^th respondent Grama Panchayat is not to be reserved for any category in the ensuing election to be conducted by the 2^nd respondent.

3. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or the 2^nd respondent to consider and dispose Exhibit P7 representation in accordance with law forthwith

4. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the competent among the respondents to undertake the exercise of allotment of the post of President in the Grama Panchayats of Kottayam District in terms of Ext. P1 by excluding the 6^th respondent.

5. Issue any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, as the petitioner may seek and this Hon’ble Court deems fit, in the facts and circumstances of the case and allow this petition with all costs. AND

6. Dispense with the filing of the translation of vernacular documents.”[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is against Ext.P2 and also to declare that the post of President of the 6^th respondent Grama Panchayat is not to be reserved for any category in the ensuing election to be conducted by the 2^nd respondent.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala State Election Commission and the learned Special Government Pleader.

4. A preliminary objection is raised by the Standing Counsel appearing for the State Election Commission stating that this Court cannot entertain the prayers in this Writ Petition in the light of the dictum laid down by this Court in State of Kerala and Others v. Noufal Babu E.K. and Others [2020 KHC 5613]. It is submitted that the general election for the year 2025 has already been declared. I will consider that point first.

5. Admittedly, the State Election Commission declared the general election to the local bodies for the year 2025 on

10.11.2025. The election is scheduled to be conducted on 09.12.2025 and 11.12.2025. Whether this Court can interfere in such situation is the question to be decided. In Noufal Babu’s case (supra), this Court considered the matter in detail. To know the facts of the case, I will extract paragraph No.1 and to know the dictum laid down in the judgment, I will extract paragraph No.70 of the above judgment:

“1. The writ appeals are filed by the State and its officials, and the Kerala State Election Commission as captioned above, challenging the judgments dated 16-11- 2020, 19.11.2020 and 20.11.2020 rendered by the learned single Judge in various writ petitions, whereby the learned single Judge allowed the writ petitions and directed the Kerala State Election Commission to recast the reservation by rotation to the office of the President and Chairpersons of the local bodies in question, pursuant to the notifications issued by the State Election Commission dated 03.11.2020 in that regard, which is a process of the General Elections notified by the State Election Commission. Though one of the writ petitions was filed earlier to the notification issued by the State Election Commission and the other writ petitions were filed on 06.11.2020 i.e., the date of the announcement of elections by the State Election Commission, the judgment was passed on 16.11.2020 after the notification of election issued by the State Government on 12.11.2020.

70. Bearing in mind the provisions of the Constitution of India and the relevant statutes and so also the proposition of law laid down by the Apex Court in the aforementioned judgments as well as in N.P. Ponnuswami and Mohinder Singh Gill (supra), we have no hesitation to hold that the issues raised by the petitioners are cl