IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4812 of 2010(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ P.ANILKUMAR @ CHEMBAZHANTHI ANIL, RESIDING AT MADHURIMA, EASWARA VILASAM ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE RETURNING OFFICER, ELECTION TO THE KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR CHILD WELFARE/DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR CHILD WELFARE, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN FOR R3 SRI.RAJAN VELLOTH FOR R3 SRI.SAIJO HASSAN FOR R3 SRI.A.S.SABU FOR R3 SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI FOR R3 SRI.S.J.SHAJ MOHAN FOR R3 GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 4812/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: THE TRUE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF BYELAWS. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION NOTIFICATION DT 18.1.2010. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE DRAFT VOTERS LIST 21.1.2010. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 6.2.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SAMPLE BALLOT PAPER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXTS. OF R3 EXT.R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION NOTIFICATION DT 28.10.2006. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 4812 OF 2010 (B) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a member of the 3rd respondent, the Kerala State Council for Child Welfare. 2. The election to the office bearers and Executive Committee of the 3rd respondent is scheduled to be held tomorrow and Ext.P2 is the election notification. Clause 8 of Ext.P2 provided that the members who report for polling should produce the photo ID cards issued by the 3rd respondent Council. The insistence on the production of ID cards as a precondition for voting as per Clause 8 of Ext.P2 is one of the grievances of the petitioner. The other grievance is against Ext.P5, the ballot paper prescribed for polling. Petitioner states that from the counter foil of the ballot paper, which is to be retained by the Returning Officer, the ballot paper on which the vote that is cast by the voter can be traced and identified. It is stated that voters are now being threatened that unless they cast vote to a particular panel of candidates, physical harm will be caused to them. It is stated that it is in order to facilitate such illegality that, serial number, WPC 4812/10 :2 : membership number and signature are insisted on the counter foil of the ballot paper and on the ballot paper itself. 3. The learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions from the 2nd respondent, the Returning Officer. In so far as the objection raised by the petitioner against the ballot paper is concerned, learned Government Pleader submits that the Returning Officer is a Senior IAS Officer, and that the counter foil and the ballot papers will be retained by the Returning Officer in a sealed box and will be opened only on the directions of the competent forum authorised for resolving the disputes concerning the election. Therefore, he is ruling out any possibility of the counter foil or the ballot paper reaching any undesirable hands, and therefore submits that the apprehension of the petitioner is misplaced. 4. In so far as the objection raised by the petitioner about Clause 8 of Ext.P2, insisting production of ID card issued by the 3rd respondent is concerned, counsel for the 3rd respondent submits that most of the members have been issued ID cards with photographs affixed thereon. It is stated that if at all members desire to have fresh ID cards, arrangement has already been WPC 4812/10 :3 : made for issuing ID cards to them, and that, ID cards will be issued till the closing of the polls. It is also pointed out that similar condition was incorporated in the election notification published in connection with the previous elections also and that none had any complaint. 5. As far as the ID cards are concerned, it is not in dispute that there is no provision in the bylaws of the 3rd respondent providing for the issue of ID cards or insisting on the production of such ID cards for election. However, that does not mean that the 3rd respondent or its Returning Officer is not entitled to insist on the production of documents such as ID cards issued by the 3rd respondent for ensuring the identity of the voter concerned. However, the requirement of proof of identity cannot be stretched too far and should not result in a situation where the rights of the members to cast their votes are defeated for want of ID cards. In this case, the 3rd respondent has no case that before the election, either this year, or on any of the previous occasions, they have issued any public notice intimating the requirement of ID cards or requiring the members to approach the 3rd respondent and obtain ID cards. They have also not issued any notice that those who do WPC 4812/10 :4 : not produce ID cards issued by the 3rd respondent will not be allowed to vote. In such a situation, until such regular arrangement is uniformly made, in fairness, it is only appropriate that, if any member produce acceptable documents such as Voter ID cards issued by the Election Commission of India, Passport, PAN Card or Driving Licence, such members should also be allowed to exercise their right of franchise. 6. Therefore, there will be a direction to the Returning Officer to permit such of those members, who produce Electoral ID Card issued by the Election Commission of India, Passport, PAN Card issued by the Income Tax Department or Driving Licence in proof of their identity, to caste their votes. 7. In so far as the second grievance of the petitioner regarding the ballot paper is concerned, admittedly in terms of the byelaws, it is the Munsiff's Court, Trivandrum, which is conferred with the jurisdiction to resolve electoral disputes. The Returning Officer is a Government Officer, who has no vested interest in either of the groups contesting the election or in the 3rd respondent itself. The Returning Officer has undertaken before this Court that the counterfoil and the ballot papers will be kept in WPC 4812/10 :5 : sealed box in his custody and will be opened depending upon the orders, if any, passed by Courts, in relation to disputes concerning the election. This will ensure that the ballot paper or the counter foil does not reach the hands of any vested interest, in which event only, it will be misused. In such a situation, I do not think any direction is called for concerning the ballot papers, as sought for by the petitioner. 8. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp