IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2007 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1929 WP(C).No. 16513 of 2007(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ KANNAPPAN @ KANDAPPAN M.C., S/O CHENGAN, MUTHUVANUR, PUTHUR, KAIPARAMBU, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.C.PRABIN BENNY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. RETURNING OFFICER, MUNDUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., R 189 MUNDUR P.O., THRISSUR. 2. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.K.JAYAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMBERS IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE MUNDUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK DTD. 11-10-95 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.E/468/07/2007/SCEC ISSUED BY THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION ON 7-5-07 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUD BY THE RESPONDENT DTD. 28-5-07 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KAIPARAMBU VILLAGE OFFICER DTD. 29-5-07 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE VOTERS LIST EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 29-5-07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE REGISTRAR, THRISSUR. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE REVENUE DIARY EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF POSTAL RECEIPT EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF VOTERS LIST OF THE BANK EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF VOTERS LIST RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS EXT.R3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE NOMINATION DTD. 28-5-07 EXT.R3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EXT.R3(C) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE DATED 26-5-07 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, THRISSUR EXT.R3(D) TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL LIST OF CANDIDATES PUBLISHED ON 29-5-07 EXT.R3(E) TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL LIST PUBLISHED ON 30-5-2007 /True Copy/ PA to Judge. K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 16513 OF 2007 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st May , 2007 JUDGMENT Petitioner belongs to Kanakkan Community which is a Hindu Scheduled Caste community. He is the member of the respondent Co-operative Bank. Election was notified to the seat reserved for the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities. Petitioner produced Ext.P4 community certificate. His further case is that his nomination was taken up for scrutiny on 29-5- 2007 and the 1st respondent asked explanation for the difference in the name of the nomination form and in the community certificate. In the bank records the petitioner's name is also mentioned as Kandappan. In the community certificate issued by the Village Officer his name is mentioned as Kannappan. Then the petitioner produced Ext.P4 Certificate issued by the Village Officer showing that Kandappan and Kannappan are one and the same person. The further case of the petitioner is that without (2) considering Ext.P4 certificate, the 1st respondent Returning Officer rejected the nomination. 2. Learned Govt. pleader got instructions. Petitioner seeks mandamus commanding 1st respondent to accept his nomination to contest in the election and also seeks a declaration that the rejection of the nomination of the petitioner is improper. It is pointed out that the petitioner signed in the name of Kannappan in the nomination paper. The petitioner was granted 45 minutes time to produce evidence. It is also pointed out that the petitioner produced Community Certificate issued by the Village Officer . Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could be given time to produce Community certificate from the Tahsildar . There is no case that it is produced before the returning officer. 3. Having regard to the provision under Rule 35 (f) the final list of the candidates is to be published on the date of the scrutiny of the nomination papers is completed. Going by ExtP2 the scrutiny is to be completed on 29-05-2007 at 11 A.M. 30-05- (3) 2007 is the date on which the candidates to withdraw their nomination papers. It is submitted by the Govt. pleader that already the list is published. In such circumstances without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move an application seeking to challenge the election, this writ petition is dismissed. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE es