IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 19674 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- PRADEEP V.R., VADAYADAYIL HOUSE, MACHIPLAVU, ADIMALI. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE RETURNING OFFICER, ADIMALI RURAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., NO. 1585, ADIMALI, UNIT INSPECTOR, ADIMALI UNIT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTATN RAGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SCOEITEIS (G) MUNNAR. 2. THE ADIMALI RURAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., NO. 1585, ADIMALI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 19674 OF 2009 (D) ===================== Dated this the 16th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The election to the managing Committee of the 2nd respondent society is scheduled to take place on 25/7/09. Petitioner, who is a member, filed his nomination, which was rejected. According to the petitioner, the rejection of his nomination was on the allegation that his membership number was wrongly shown in the nomination form. Since it was his case that no formal order was issued, when the matter came up for admission on 14/7/2009, it was adjourned to today with a direction to the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions in the matter from the 1st respondent. 2. Instruction has been received and it is reported by the learned Government Pleader that as averred in the writ petition itself, it was because membership number was wrongly shown, that the nomination was rejected. 3. A reading of the second proviso to Rule 35A (6)(e) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules show that nomination of a candidate shall not be rejected merely on the ground of incorrect WPC19674/09 :2 : description of his name or any other particulars relating to the candidate, if his identity is established beyond reasonable doubt. In so far as this case is concerned, there is no dispute about the identity of the person, but it is purely on account of the mistake committed in the nomination form, that nomination was rejected. 4. In my view, the rejection of the nomination is against the aforesaid proviso and therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 1st respondent shall accept the nomination of the petitioner and enable him to contest in the election in the Managing committee of the 2nd respondent Committee scheduled as per Ext.P1 notice. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp