1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:24.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD)No.3433 of 2011 T.Murugarajan ...Petitioner Vs. 1.The Chief Election Commissioner, Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sakkon, Ashoka Road, New Delhi. 2.The Chief Election Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Election Commission, Chennai. ...Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 20.03.2011 and to extend the time for further 10 days for canvassing and adjourn the polling date to some other date. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ramu For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramanian Addl.Govt.Pleader ****** ORDER The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition directing the respondents to consider his representation dated 20.03.2011 and to extend time for further 10 days for canvassing and thereby, adjourning the polling date to some other date. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the General Secretary of V.U.C.Sangam Peravai, Tamil Nadu. He is doing public welfare activities. The respondent has announced the assembly election to the State for the year 2011 setting out the following dates:- Date of Nomination : 19.03.2011 Last date of Nomination : 26.03.2011 Scrutiny of Nomination : 28.03.2011 Date of withdrawl of Nomination : 30.03.2011 Date of Poll : 13.04.2011 He made his nomination to the respondents on 19.03.2011 for the Tirunelveli West Assembly Constituency. In Tamil Nadu, the recognized https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 parties such as Congress, BJP and the regional parties like D.M.K., A.I.A.D.M.K., P.M.K., D.M.D.K etc., are having separate election symbols. However, for the independent candidates so far no symbol has been alloted. As far as the petitioner and other independent candidates are concerned, the respondent will allot the election symbol only on 30.03.2011, the last date for withdrawal of the nomination. Hence, the petitioner and other independent candidates may not have much time to canvass for the elections. Therefore, the petitioner made a request to the respondents to extend the time by further 10 days for canvassing and for adjourning the poll date to some other date. The said representation was not considered and hence, the petitioner was driven to file this Writ Petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that as per Section 30(d) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, (for short 'the Act'), there should be a clear 14 days time for the election from the date of withdrawal of the nomination. In the case on hand, the last date for withdrawal of the nomination is on 30.03.2011 and the elections are scheduled on 13.04.2011, which is less than 14 days, as prescribed under the Act. That apart, he has contended that as per Section 153 of the said Act, the respondents have got the power to postpone the election. While so, when a representation has been sent to the respondents, the same was not considered and hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition. 4. I am not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition for the following reasons:- (1)The petitioner who was aware of the election on 13.04.2011 and who was also aware that the last date for withdrawal of the nomination is 30.03.2011 has not taken any steps to approach the respondents for postponing the election in time. The representation is dated 20.03.2011 and the same was sent by registered post to the respondents on 21.03.2011. Thus, it shows that the petitioner is not serious about the matter. (2)That apart, the petitioner has already filed a nomination on 19.03.2011 and the present representation as stated earlier was sent only on 21.03.2011. (3)A similar set of Writ Petitions were filed before the Principal Bench and the Hon'ble First Bench has rejected the request made in those cases. (4)When the election process has already begun, the same cannot be stalled at the eleventh hour. In view of the above stated position, I am not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. SD/- Deputy Registrar (LA) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 To 1.The Chief Election Commissioner, Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sakkon, Ashoka Road, New Delhi. 2.The Chief Election Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Election Commission, Chennai. +1 CC TO MR. M. RAMU , ADVOCATE S.R NO. 7725 W.P.(MD)No.3433 of 2011 24.03.2011 ssm PAM 25.03.2011/4C/3P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/