IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 28 of 2009(C) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.C.RAMAN, S/O.OF CHOTHAN, THARAYAPPADAVIL, UDAYANAPURAM,VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE RETURNING OFFICER/ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(SC/ST) OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP.SOCIETIES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING FEDERATION LTD, KALOOR, COCHIN,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. K.V.SYAMALA, DIRECTOR BOARD MEMBER, NATTIKA FIRKA BHAVANA NIRMANA SAHAKARANA SANGHOM LTD NO.R.346,EDAMUTTOM.P.O, THRISSUR. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.A.G.ANEETHA R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN R3 BY ADV.SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPC.28/09 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION NOTIFICATION DATED 19.12.2008. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE SPECIMEN OF THE NOMINATION PAPER. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.12.2008 REJECTING THE NOMINATION. /TRUE COPY/ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.28 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner submitted nomination as the nominee of Vaikom Central Housing Co-operative Society Ltd.No.K 669 for election to the committee of the second respondent, the apex society, following Ext.P1 notification. That nomination is rejected on the ground that he has chosen two different constituencies using one nomination paper. This is under challenge. 2. Ext.P1 notification classifies the electoral college into three wards. Category B is the sole reserved seat for SC/ST candidates. Category C provides for reservation of one seat for women. Category A is the general category, where, it is specifically stated that a representative each has to be elected from each revenue district. Therefore, the description as to the identity of the revenue district to which a person contests is relevant only for the purpose of WPC.28/09 Page numbers identifying as to from which revenue district he would contest under Category A - general category. There is no classification among categories B and C on the basis of revenue districts. 3. Going by the nomination paper which has been placed before me by the Retuning Officer, what the petitioner did was that, he wrote 'Kottayam' and the words 'reservation for SC/ST ' against the column which required him to state the name of the revenue district to which the candidate contests. He also filled up the declaration of the candidate and the declaration of the candidate contesting for the seat reserved for SC/ST. Both those declarations may be necessary in case of candidates contesting for SC/ST seats. However, the Returning Officer cannot be found fault with on any grounds of law for having rejected the petitioner's nomination paper because the petitioner had also stated that he contests from Kottayam. That is, on facts, relevant only as regards category A - general. Hence, there is no WPC.28/09 Page numbers error of law apparent on the face of record for the writ court to interfere with the rejection of the nomination. Not only that, the right, if any, of the society, of which the petitioner is a member, to challenge the election has also to be preserved. Hence, without prejudice to such course, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.