IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2009 / 13TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 1083 of 2007(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THANKAYYAN, S/O.APPIYAN NADAR, ALITHA BHAVAN, PULAVANGAL, THIRUPURATHOOR DESOM, THIRUPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUPURAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. D. RAVEENDRAN, S/O.DAMODHARAN NADAR, PRESIDENT, THIRUPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, RESIDING AT MANKOOTTATHU VEEDU, THIRUPURAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM FOR R1 SRI.V.S.BABU GIREESAN FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.1083 of 2007 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P6, by which the 1st respondent rejected an application made by the petitioner praying to disqualify the 2nd respondent under Section 35(a) read with Sections 34(1)(b)(1) and 36 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 on the ground that the 2nd respondent was convicted by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Neyyattinkara in C.C.No.256/97. The issue was considered and the 1st respondent took the view that the conviction of the 2nd respondent was for offences punishable under Sections 143, 149, 427 & 447 of IPC, and that the offences do not involve moral turpitude. It is this order, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the judgment of the Trial Court, the 2nd respondent had filed Crl. Appeal No.902/2005 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, and that the Appellate Court by its judgment WP(C) No.1083/2007 -2- set aside the Trial Court's judgment convicting the 2nd respondent and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. In the light of this, the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ petition leaving open the contentions raised. Therefore, having regard to the above, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, making it clear that the contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition are left open. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg