IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2008 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1930 W.P(C).No. 15991 of 2008(D) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- A.M.KRISHNAN, AGED 63, S/O.MANI, ANAKKATIPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.OP.KOORKANCHERY, THRISSUR-680007. BY ADV. SRI.N.DHARMADAN (SR.) SMT.D.P.RENU SRI.S.SATHI KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSI0N, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRICHUR. 3. K.S.THANKAMANI, COUNSILORS, DIVISION NO.40, KOORKANCHERY, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, NEDUPUZHA-P.O. 4. P.U.HAMZA, COUNCILLOR, DIVISION, NO.12, MULLAKKARA, THRISSUR CORPORATION THRISSUR, MANNUTHY -P.O. 5. M.K.SURYAPRAKAS, COUNCILLOR, DIVISION NO.31, CHIYYARAM SOUTH, THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR, KOORKANCHERRY P.O. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. K.R. DEEPA ADV. SRI. MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 15991 OF 2008 - D = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 30th May, 2008 J U D G M E N T The prayer sought for in this writ petition is to direct the 1st respondent to pass final orders on Ext. P4 and prevent respondents 3 to 5 from exercising any right in the capacity as members of Thrissur Corporation Council till final decision is taken on Ext. P4. 2. Petitioner submits that respondents 3 to 5 had won the election to the Thrissur Municipal Corporation Council under the coalition, Left Democratic Front and DIC (K). According to him, since 6.3.2008, respondents 3 to 5 have joined the Indian National Congress (I) and as a result thereof, they have rendered themselves liable for having defected from the coalition, rendering themselves liable for disqualification in terms of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999 and the rules framed thereunder. According to the petitioner, it is on account of the above, he has moved the 1st respondent invoking its power under Section 3 of the Act to disqualify the aforesaid respondents. It is W.P.(C) No. 15991 OF 2008 -2- stated that the said application is being inordinately delayed despite the statutory prescription that it should be decided within 60 days. 3. Petitioner submits that in the meanwhile, a no-confidence motion is being moved against the Chairman of the Health and Education Standing Committee of the Council with the support of respondents 3 to 5. It is stated that since Ext.P4 is being inordinately delayed, the 1st respondent should be directed to expeditely decide on Ext. P4 while at the same time further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P5 should be kept in abeyance. 4. The Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the 1st respondent and has filed a statement. Proceedings sheet has been made available in the court which indicates that since 22.4.2008 so far the adjudication in pursuance to Ext. P4 was posted on 6.5.2008, 13.5.2008, 27.5.2008 and is now posted to 10.6.2008. It is stated that the matter has to be decided in terms of the procedure laid down in the Civil Procedure Code and after recording evidence and that the period prescribed in the rules is not an absolute one. 5. The fact that the matter requires expeditious disposal W.P.(C) No. 15991 OF 2008 -3- cannot be disputed. However, it is seen that though adjudication has already commenced no substantial progress has been made by the 1st respondent. Therefore, the 1st respondent has to take necessary steps for an early conclusion of the proceedings on Ext. P4. 6. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that until a decision on Ext. P4 is rendered, further proceedings following Ext. P5, the no-confidence motion, should be stayed. I do not think at this stage that it will be proper for this Court to pass such an order. This is for the reason that a member of a local authority gets disqualified only from the date an order of disqualification is passed by the 1st respondent. The fact remains that as on today there is no order passed disqualifying respondents 3 to 5 and therefore like anybody else they are entitled to participate in any proceedings of the Corporation and cast their vote. In view of this I decline the prayer to stay Ext. P5 pending finalisation of Ext. P4. 7. The writ petition will stand disposed of directing that the 1st respondent shall conclude the proceedings following Ext. P4, as W.P.(C) No. 15991 OF 2008 -4- expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 six weeks from today. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-