IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33376 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.M.REENA, ANAZ MANZIL, ERAVICHIRA KIZHAKKU, SOORANADU P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE RETURNING OFFICER, G9, SOORANADU SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH, (SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT), OFFICE OF THE AEO, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 3. SHYLAJA S., SHAJISHA MANZIL, SOORANADU THEKKU, KAKKAKUNNU P.O., THRIKKUNNAPUZHA NORTH, KOLLAM. 4. THE SOORANADU SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SOORANADU, KOLLAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. SHRI MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN (STANDING COUNSEL-ELECTION COMMISSION) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.33376 Of 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a contesting candidate of Ward No.5 of Sooranad South Grama Panchayat. The counting of the votes was held on 27.10.2010 and it is averred in the Writ Petition that after the counting it was announced that the petitioner has secured 443 votes out of the 884 valid votes. The 3rd respondent secured 441 votes. Thereafter, recounting was done as per the request of the agent of the 3rd respondent. As a result of the recounting, the 3rd respondent was declared elected. 2. The petitioner has got a contention that even though the petitioner sought for a recounting, that was rejected by Exhibit P3. It is mainly contended that the proceedings are in violation of Rule 51 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj(Conduct of Election)Rules, 1995. The contentions have been elaborated in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Writ Petition. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission pointed out that the 3rd respondent has already been elected and has sworn as a member of the Panchayat. It is W.P.(C)No.33376/10 -2- further pointed out that the remedy of the petitioner is to file a petition challenging the election under the relevant provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act and reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in Sohan Lal Vs. Babu Gandhi (2003(1) SCC 108). Once the result of the election has been declared and the successful candidates have been declared to have been elected, then the remedy under the Statute is to file an election petition seeking to set aside the election. The petitioner has to avail of the said remedy and Section 102 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act provides for various grounds for declaring the election to be void also. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file an election petition, the Writ Petition is closed. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn