1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P(MD)No.11235 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 Nanji K.Varatharajan, President, District Congress Committee, Thanjavur South, Parisutham Nagar 1st street, V.O.C.Nagar, Thanjavur-7. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The State Election Commission, Chennai. 2.The District Collector, Thanjavur District. 3.The Commissioner cum Block Local Body Election Officer, Block Development Officer, Thanjavur. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned communication passed by the third respondent in his communication Na.Ka.No.2337/2011/A5, dated 19.09.2011 and quash the same and consequently direct the third respondent to publish fresh list of polling booths as per the guidelines of Panchayat Local Body Elections 2011 and conduct elections in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Raju For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan, Special Govt. Pleader O R D E R ********** This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the impugned communication issued by the third respondent in his communication Na.Ka.No.2337/2011/A5, dated 19.09.2011 and to direct the third respondent to publish fresh list of polling booths as per the guidelines of Panchayat Local Body Elections, 2011 and conduct election, in accordance with law. 2. Heard Mr.N.Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. By consent, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 4. Though the Writ Petition has been filed challenging the communication of the third respondent declining to grant relief sought for by the petitioner to locate the polling booths within two kilometres, the learned counsel for the petitioner now states that the petitioner is willing to give fresh representation to the authority concerned, based on the guidelines issued for conduct of local body election, more particularly, the guidelines Nos.A and C. 5. In view of the above, as and when the petitioner makes such representation, the authority may consider the same, if it is feasible or possible. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim. The authority is at liberty to consider the claim of the petitioner, on its own merits and in accordance with law, if the same is required. 6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. pm Sd/- Assistant Registrar[Crl side] /True copy/ To Sub Assistant Registrar 1.The State Election Commission, Chennai. 2.The District Collector, Thanjavur District. 3.The Commissioner cum Block Local Body Election Officer, Block Development Officer, Thanjavur. W.P.(MD)No.11235 of 2011 Dated:29.09.2011 2P/4C RPB : 19.10.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/