IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18654 of 2009(B) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.DILIPKUMAR, AGED 47 YEARS, (SL.NO.110, MEMBERSHIP NO.218), S/O.MANGALA BHANU, "ANITHA MANDIRAM", ERAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.R.RANJITH MR.M.T.SURESHKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------------- 1. KOLLAM DISTRICT MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS' CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD. NO.Q-420(COMOS), RAMANKULANGARA, KAVANAD P.O., KOLLAM-3, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE RETURNING OFFICER, ELECTION TO COMOS LTD. NO.Q-420, (CO-OPERATIVE INSPECTOR, CHATHANNUR UNIT, KOLLAM). 3. THE ASST. REGISTRAR (GENERAL), KOLLAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.C. SANTHOSHKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.18654 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 7th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T Ext.P4 is under challenge in the writ petition. 2. By Ext.P2, election to the Managing Committee of the 1st respondent was notified and the election is to be held on 23/07/2009. In pursuance to Ext.P2, a draft voters list was published and the petitioner filed Ext.P3 objection as according to the petitioner, the draft voters list was defective on account of the inclusion of ineligible members. It is stated that without considering the objection, Ext.P4 final voters list was published. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P4 and to direct that a fresh voters list be prepared deleting the ineligible persons. 3. The learned Government Pleader on instructions, has produced before me order dated 29/06/2009 passed by the Returning Officer dealing with Ext.P3 objection filed by the petitioner and it is the specific case of the learned Government WP(C) No.18654/2009 -2- Pleader that though the proceedings were sent to the petitioner, that was declined to be accepted. 4. A reading of the order dated 29/06/2009 shows that the Returning Officer has rejected the objection, taking the view that the complaint is vague in as much as it did not indicate the names of those who according to the petitioner are ineligible. It is also stated that the list has been prepared strictly in terms of the bye-laws. 5. Now that the final voters list has been published, and in view of the reasons stated in the order dated 29/06/2009, I do not think that this Court will be justified in interfering with the same in this proceedings. Further, even in the writ petition, apart from making the vague general statement of ineligible members, the petitioner has not given the names of persons, who according to the petitioner are ineligible. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to pursue statutory remedies, that are available. The writ petition fails, and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg