IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2009 / 12TH ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 1415 of 2009() AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.17328/2009 Dated 29/06/2009 ............................. APPELLANT/ 2 nd PETITIONER IN W.P.C 17328/09: M.K. RAJAN, (M.NO.236), MANAPARAMBIL VEEDU, PARAVOOTHARA NORTH PARUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN W.P.C17328/09: 1. THE RETURNING OFFICER/ PARUR UNIT INSPECTOR/ JUNIOR INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(G), NORTH PARUR. 2. THE SAMOOHYA KSHEMA SAHAKARANA SANGHAM LTD.NO. E 779, NANTHYATTUKUNNAM, NORTH PARUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.R. BINDU THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 1415 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant was the second petitioner in the Writ Petition. He along with four others approached this Court, feeling aggrieved by the action taken by the Returning Officer in removing them and 22 others from the voters' list. The election is scheduled to be held on 8.7.2009. The resolution to conduct the election was taken on 8.5.2009. The Writ petitioners paid the membership fee on 11.5.2009. The Returning Officer, apparently maintaining the view that the membership fee should have been paid 60 days before the date fixed for election, removed them from the electoral roll. The Returning Officer has not given any specific reason for removing the writ petitioners from the voters' list, it is submitted. It is in this factual background that the Writ Petition was filed. The learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition, taking note of the fact that the writ petitioners have other statutory remedies under the provisions of the W.A.NO. 1415/2009 2 Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the learned Single Judge, this Writ Appeal is filed. 2. When a learned Judge dismisses a Writ Petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy, normally the Appellate Court will not interfere with the same, unless it is shown that the refusal to entertain the Writ Petition by the learned Judge was arbitrary or perverse. We find it difficult to hold that the refusal to entertain the Writ Petition was arbitrary or perverse. On the facts, a reasonable view has been taken by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, this Writ Appeal cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed, without prejudice to the contentions of the appellant and his right to pursue the statutory remedies available to him under law. (K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ W.A.NO. 1415/2009 3 K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. W.A. NO.1415/2009 JUDGMENT 3rd July, 2009 W.A.NO. 1415/2009 4