IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2010 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 15701 of 2010(K) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- ASHA CHERIAN, W/O. SHAJAHAN CHERIYAN JOHN, AGED 37 YEARS, PRESIDENT, PANMANA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, EDAPPALLY KOTTA.P.O, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. BY MR.V.PHILIP MATHEWS, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. NISAR, S/O. THAJUDEEN KUNJU, KOIPURATHU, KOLLAKA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY MR. MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC, K.S.E.COMMN. FOR R1. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15701 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of May, 2010. J U D G M E N T In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the 1st respondent to hear and dispose of Exhibit P7 as a preliminary issue before proceeding with further steps in O.P.No.51/09. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission. The petitioner has raised various grounds in the writ petition to show that the question regarding the maintainability should have been decided by the Election Commission as a preliminary issue. Exhibit P7 is a copy of the I.A filed by her seeking for consideration of the said issue as a preliminary one. It is submitted that a decision on the same will go to the root of the matter. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission submitted that all the issues will be considered by the Election W.P.(C) No.15701/2010 2 Commission, including the question of maintainability, when the main matter is heard and disposed of. The question is whether the plea raised regarding maintainability has to be decided as a preliminary issue. Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that this Court should direct the Election Commission to consider the question of maintainability as a preliminary issue, I am not satisfied that this Court at this stage should issue a positive direction since every one of the contentions are liable to be considered by the Election Commission while disposing of the matter. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission submitted that this Court in a Writ Petition filed by the 2nd respondent as W.P.(C) No.8428/2010 had directed the Commission to dispose of the matter finally within a period of three months. The apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is in the light of the directions issued in the said case that the Commission is not considering the application. Seeking for review of the said judgment, the petitioner filed a review petition as R.P.No.449/2010 which was W.P.(C) No.15701/2010 3 dismissed after hearing both parties. It is upto the Election Commission to take a decision as to whether the I.A. has to be entertained or not. This Court need not express anything finally in the matter since it is upto the Election Commission itself to take a decision in accordance with law and procedure. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp