IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2010 / 27TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 20774 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.P.ABDUL MUTHALIB, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, PADNE KALIKADAVU, PADNE P.O., CHERUVATHUR (VIA) KASARGODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAVI SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, PADNE GRAMA PANCHAYATH PADANNA P.O., CHERUVATHUR (VIA) KASARGODE DISTRICT, PIN-671 312. 2. THE TAHASILDAR (ENQUIRY OFFICER), HOSDURG, KASARGODE DISTRICT, PIN-671 315. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, VIDYANAGAR, KASARGODE, PIN-671 123. 4. THE STATE DELIMITATION COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-695 001. 5. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-695 001. 6. N.P.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, NOW WORKING AS TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE BUILDINGS, NEAR SUB JAIL, KASARGODE, PIN-671 121. (*)ADDL.R7. C.KUNHIKRISHNAN, S/O.LATE AMBU, AGED 57 YEARS, UDINOOR THEKKUMPURAM, UDINOOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. [(*)ADDL.R7 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16/08/2010 IN I.A.NO.11048/2010] ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM FOR R5 SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN,SC,DELIMITATIO FOR R4 SRI.M.SASINDRAN FOR ADDL.R7 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NOS. 21729/2010 AND 22174/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). Nos.20774/2010-V, 21729/2010-M & 22174/2010-V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 18th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T These writ petitions concern the challenge against delimitation of Pallikkara, Padanna and Uduma Grama Panchayats. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the Commission. 3. Mainly the complaints are related to the variation in number of houses of different wards, if they are reckoned along with the assessment registers. In W.P.(C). No.21729/2010, the petitioner has produced Ext.P3, a table showing the same with reference to the final order delimiting the wards. In W.P.(C).No.22174/2010, the same is Ext.P4 and in W.P.(C).No.20774/2010 the petitioner has detailed in paragraph (5) the discrepancies. 4. It is contended that when the number of buildings as per the final order along with the number of houses reflected in the said order are taken, there are certain discrepancies, which on a reference to the proceedings itself will be evident. It is therefore submitted that the same is a matter for consideration by the Commission under Section 11 of the Panchayat Raj Act. It is pointed out that if those discrepancies remain then the real voters W.P.(C). Nos.20774/2010-V, 21729/2010-M & 22174/2010-V -:2:- representing those houses may not be able to cast their vote in the election. 5. The learned Standing Counsel for the Commission submitted that the final order delimiting the wards has been published by way of a notification in the Gazette and this Court cannot go into the validity of the same under Article 243-O(a) of the Constitution of India. 6. Evidently, Section 11 of the Panchayat Raj Act is for correction or errors if any in the proceedings. Section 11 provides that “the State Election Commission or an officer authorised by it or the Delimitation Commission may, from time to time, correct any printing mistake in any order made under Section 10 or any error therein arising from an inadvertent slip or omission”. Whether the defects pointed out by the petitioners will come within the scope of the said provision is a matter for the Commission to consider. Therefore, without going into the merits of the contentions raised in writ petitions, they are disposed of with the following directions. 7. The petitioners may file appropriate representations before the Delimitation Commission detailing any errors in the delimitation order within one week from today and if so, the same will be considered by W.P.(C). Nos.20774/2010-V, 21729/2010-M & 22174/2010-V -:3:- the Commission in exercise of the power under Section 11 to find whether delimitation order suffered from any error or omissions which can be corrected under Section 11. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms