IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2010 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35179 of 2010(V) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- ABDULLA SHAHUL HAMEED, S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 65 YEARS, MEPPURATH HOUSE, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP M.VARUGHESE RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. KERALA WAKF BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, V.I.P.ROAD, KALOOR, COCHIN-682 017. 2. ABDULKHADER, S/O.ALIPILLA, VETTIPPURAM HOUSE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITT DISTRICT 689 645. 3. FIROZ, S/O.MEERA PILLA, PUTHENVEETTIL, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 645. R1 BY ADV. SRI. ABDUL HASSAN, SC, KMF THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C) NO.35179 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an elected candidate. He is the 17th respondent in O.P.No.164/2009, filed by certain other persons impugning the election of the petitioner and others. In this writ petition, prayers are the following:- “1. Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ direction or order directing the 1st respondent not to dispose the election petition O.P.No.164/2009 on the next posting date itself, ie; on 10.1.2011. 2. Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ direction or order to withdraw O.P.No.164/2009 from the 1st board and transfer the same to the Wakf Tribunal, Kollam forthwith for early disposal.” 2. Although the prayers are as above, counsel for the petitioner submits that his endeavour is only to expedite disposal of the petition. 3. As rightly pointed out by the Standing Counsel for the respondents, petitioner is an elected candidate, whose W.P(C) NO.35179 OF 2010 2 election is impugned by certain other persons and therefore, petitioner has no locus standi to seek expeditious disposal of the election petition for the reason that none of his rights are affected, nor is he prejudiced in any manner on account of the alleged delay in the disposal of the petition. That apart, in this writ petition, he has also not impleaded any of the other parties in the election petition. Therefore, I am not satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case before this court to exercise powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to require expeditious disposal of the petition, giving overriding priority over all other pending matters. Therefore, I am not persuaded to issue any direction as sought for. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE dmb