IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 6264 of 2009(C) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. MADHAVAN.N, S/O. VELU, AGED 57 YEARS, NJETTALUNGAL VEEDU P.O, CHERUVAYOOR, VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. P. RAVEENDRANATH, S/O. KUMARAN NAIR, AGED 56 YEARS, VADAKKEPATT VEEDU, ANANTHAYUR, VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KURICHATH HOUSE. BY ADV. MR.R.SUDHISH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. VAZHAKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER, (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) CO-OP,REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ELECTION RETURNING OFFICER, (UNIT INSPECTOR, KONDOTTY) CO-OP,REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R2 & R3 BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. A.G. ANEETHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.6264 of 2009-C = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT First petitioner submitted nomination pursuant to Ext.P1 notification for election to the committee of the first respondent. The nominations were scrutinised on 19-2-2009. The first petitioner's nomination has been rejected. The questions of facts arising for decision would be as to whether the first petitioner had submitted Ext.P3 certificate on 18-2-2009 along with the nomination or not and as to whether the seconder of the nomination had shown his name appropriately in the nomination or whether his name as it occurs in the final list of voters is different from his real name and if so, what is the effect of that. These are not matters that need be gone into in writ jurisdiction when remedy by way of Section 69 of the KCS Act is WP(C)6264/2009 -: 2 :- available. I also deem it inappropriate to entertain this matter at this point of time since the election is listed on 4-3-2009 and this writ petition is filed only on 25-2-2009 challenging the rejection of the nomination on 19-2-2009. It may not be appropriate to interfere with the electoral process, as of now. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed leaving open all rights, remedies and contentions to be urged in appropriate election dispute under Section 69 of the KCS Act. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/020309