IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 19TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 5326 of 2009(I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ A.P.SALINI, VAZHATTUKONATHU VEEDU PANTHALACODE PO., MEMBER, WARD NO.16, VEMBAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. BY ADVS.MR.ELVIN PETER P.J. MR.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION THIRUVANANTHAPUTAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. PRESIDENT, VEMBAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, VEMBAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ANILKUMARAN NAIR, CHIRAKONATHU VILAYIL VEEDU, VETTINADU, VATTAPPARA PO., VOTER, WARD NO.16, VEMBAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. R1 BY ADV. MR.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM R2 BY MR.G.SUDHEER R3 BY MR.GEORGE THOMAS (MEVADA) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/09/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 5348 OF 2009 WPC NO. 5377 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.5326/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PETITION , OP. NO.48/2006 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 12.2.2009 IN OP. 48/2006 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A:- COPY OF THE ERRATUM NO.23879/LEG.C1/2008/LAW DTD. 2.2.09 PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA IN THE KERALA GAZETTE EXTRA ORDINARY NO.264 DTD. 2.2.09. R3(a):- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION IN KERALA GAZATTE DTD. 2.2.09. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).Nos.5326/2009-I, 5348/2009-K & 5377/2009-N = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of September, 2009. JUDGMENT These writ petitions relate to questions referable to discipline on ground of Section 35 (p) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. In terms of the judgment in Mercy George v. Kerala State Election Commission, 2009(3) KLT 405, affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.1794/2009, the petitioners are entitled to succeed. Following the aforesaid judgments, these writ petitions are allowed quashing the impugned orders. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/140909