IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26120 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------------- RAJESH.N.R, 1ST YEARS B PHARM SCHOOL OF MEDICAL EDUCATION CHERUVANDOOR CAMPUS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.DENU JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE REGISTRAR, M.G.UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 2. SCHOOL MEDICAL EDUCATION, GANDHI NAGAR, M.G.UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. 3. THE RETURNING OFFICER, COLLEGE UNION ELECTION-2008-09,SCHOOL OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, CHERUVANDOOR CAMPUS/GANDHI NAGAR CAMPUS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. BY SRI. T.A. SHAJI - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.26120 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a student of School of Medical Education, Cheruvandoor, which is an educational institution under the Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam. The petitioner is studying for the 1st year B.Pharm Course. For the College Union elections, this year the petitioner submitted a nomination for the post of 'Magazine Editor'. The same has been rejected on the ground that the name of the proposer of the petitioner was spelt incorrectly in the nomination paper. The petitioner's contention is that it was correctly spelt, but the returning officer misread the same. He read 's' as 'j' and that is the reason for rejection of the nomination paper. According to the petitioner, even as per the guidelines for elections, for technical reasons the nomination paper should not be rejected. The petitioner therefore, seeks the following reliefs: “(a) To call for the records of college Union election 2008-2009 from the 2 nd respondent college, including the list of candidates and the nomination papers W.P.(c)No.26120/08 2 of the petitioner and to issue writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ order or direction setting aside the order rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner for the post of magazine Editor by the 3 rd respondent. (b) To declare that the nomination paper of the petitioner for the post of Magazine Editor is valid and the petitioner is entitled to contest the college union election 2008-2009 to the Post of Magazine Editor from the 2 nd respondent College” 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the University opposes the same. According to him, this is not a technical objection at all, but an objection, which goes to the root of the matter. 3. I have heard both sides. Even in election under the Representation of the Peoples Act, the technical objections shall not be a reason for rejection of nomination. The very same rule (Rule 7(ii) of the Rules for the Conduct of Elections to the College Unions) has been incorporated in the case of College union elections also. It could be that the returning officer has misread the last letter of the petitioner's proposer's name. Therefore, I am satisfied that this is purely a technical objection. That being so, the petitioner's nomination could not have been rejected on that ground. W.P.(c)No.26120/08 3 Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to accept the petitioner's nomination and permit him to contest the election. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd