IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33036 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SUMATHI JAYAPRAKASHAN, MEPARAMBATH, ANAYAKIL, PORKLINGAD.P.O., KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA SMT.S.MEERA SMT.M.G.AISHWARYA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE RETURNING OFFICER, M-37, KUNNAMKULAM MUNICIPALITY, WARD NO.19-37, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC AND STATISTICS, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR/ DISTRICT ELECTORAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. 4. SUHASINI SOMAN, KOZHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANAYAKIL, PORKLINGAD P.O., KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR 695281. 5. KUNNAMKULAM MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, NEAR GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL, KUNNAMKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R.DEEPA ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 33036 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner and the fourth respondent are residents of Kunnamkulam Municipality. Both of them contested in the elections held on 25.10.2010 to the Kunnamkulam Municipality from Ward No.24, a reserved constituency for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes. The votes polled were counted on 27.10.2010 in the presence of the petitioner and the fourth respondent and their respective agents. Both of them secured 380 votes each. According to the petitioner, thereupon the second respondent Returning Officer tossed a coin and declared the fourth respondent elected. The petitioner thereupon states that though she challenged the same by filing Ext.P1 representation before the second respondent objecting to the procedure adopted by him, the Returning Officer rejected Ext.P1 representation on the ground that a coin was tossed to decide the result of the election with the consent of all the candidates and therefore, the complaint cannot be entertained. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the decision of the Returning Officer and seeks a direction to the WPC No.33036/2010 2 second respondent to declare the results afresh by draw of lots in the manner prescribed in section 135 of the Kerala Municipality Act. 2. It is not in dispute that the elected candidate, namely the fourth respondent would have assumed office by now as the swearing of the returned candidates started at 10 am today. I am therefore of the opinion that the remedy of the petitioner, if she is aggrieved by the declaration of the result of the election, is to challenge the election of the returned candidate by way of an election petition on the ground that the procedure prescribed in section 135 of the Kerala Municipality Act was not followed. I accordingly decline jurisdiction and dismiss the writ petition leaving open the contentions of the petitioner and reserving liberty with her to challenge the election of the returned candidate in other appropriate proceedings. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.33036/2010 3 WPC No.33036/2010 4