IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2010 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 12215 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- GEETHA KRISHNAN, D/O.LATE KANNAN TEACHER, JINSHA BHAVAN, UDAYAMANGALAM, UDMA P.O, KASARGODE. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A SRI.K.C.KIRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. V.NARAYANAN, CHAIRMAN, STANDING COMMITTEE, HEALTH AND EDUCATION, DISTRICT PANCHAYATH, POST VIDYA NAGAR, KASARAGODE. 2. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 12215 OF 2010 (B) ===================== Dated this the 7th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P5 order passed by the 2nd respondent allowing Ext.P2, IA No.63/09. By this order, delay of 14 days in filing Ext.P1 petition seeking disqualification of the petitioner has been allowed. A reading of Ext.P5 order shows that for the reasons stated therein, the 2nd respondent has accepted the explanation offered by the 1st respondent to condone the delay. Reference is also made to the medical certificate produced. 2. The power to condone delay is discretionary, and unless the said discretion has been exercised in an arbitrary manner, this Court will not be justified in interfering with the said order, muchless in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A reading of Ext.P5 order does not lead me to think that the order is vitiated for any arbitrariness. 3. Therefore, I do not find any vitiating circumstances warranting interference. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp