IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20283 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- O.V.JAFFER, S/O.MANHU.C.P., AGED 59 YEARS, K.V.HOUSE, MAMMAKUNNU, KADAMBOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHAIRMAN, STATE DE-LIMITATION COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 4. SECRETARY, MUZHAPPILANGADU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MUZHAPPILANGADU P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT-62. 5. MUZHAPPILANGADU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MUZHAPPILANGADU P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY-62. ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN,SC,DELIMITATIO FOR R2 SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.20283/2010-I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for various directions with regard to the delimitation of wards and inclusion of residential houses of the fifth respondent-Grama Panchyat. When the matter came up for admission on 29/06/2010, it was submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the Delimitation Commission that pending further orders to be passed in the writ petition, the finalisation of the proposal will be deferred. 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the second respondent as directed by this Court. Objection raised by the petitioner has been produced as Ext.P6. Therein, the petitioner has pointed out the omissions of various residential houses from different wards in the final report prepared by the Panchayat (Ext.P5), in violation of directions issued by the Commission. With regard to the same, in the statement, it is mentioned in paragraphs (5) and (6) that the various details have been verified again by the Commission. It appears that the fourth respondent, instead of including all the building numbers as per the Assessment Register kept in the office of the Panchayat has entered only the numbers of the residential buildings in W.P.(C). No.20283/2010 -:2:- Appendix 2A in Ext.P5. According to the Commission after summoning the fourth respondent, the building numbers in Appendix 2A in Ext.P5 against each ward is corrected in accordance with the building numbers contained in the Assessing Register. In paragraph (6) it is mentioned that the total number of residential buildings have been calculated as 4594 and the details of those in respect of each wards have been mentioned in paragraph (6). Accordingly, it is mentioned that the discrepancies pointed out by the petitioner have been corrected. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even now, 18 houses in Ward No.III, the details of which have been mentioned in Ext.P6, still remains to be included. It is submitted that all those are included in the Assessment Register also. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the Commission submitted that actually all the details were verified. 5. In the light of the specific plea raised by the petitioner, there will be a direction to the Commission to verify the said aspect also with respect to the records maintained by the Panchayat before finalising the draft proposal and publishing the same. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms