Rajan.P v. The State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/22ND ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 31101 of 2015 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
------------- RAJAN.P., AGED 39 YEARS S/O.PONNAIYA, VALIYAKANDATHIL HOUSE, KUZHIKANDAM KUMILY VILLAGE, KUMILY PO, PEERUMEDU TALUK IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 509.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S):
------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE KUMILY PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KUMILY PO PEERUMEDU TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 509
3. THE RETURNING OFFICER KUMILY PANCHAYATH, KUMILY PO, PEERUMEDU TALUK IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 509
4. THE TAHASILDAR PEERMED TALUK OFFICE, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 001. R3 BY ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMMISSION R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BOBY JOHN PULIKKAPARAMBIL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 31101 of 2015 (K) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------- P1 :A TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SCHOOL AUTHORITIES IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER DATED NIL P2 :A TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT ARTS COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT 25-4-1998 P3 :A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SOCIETY IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER DT 7-10-2015.
P4 :A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FOURTH RESPONDNET DT 30-9-2015.
P5 :A TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENSHOT OF THE MOBILE OF THE PETITIONER DATED NIL.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
------------------------------ //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE.
V.CHITAMBARESH, J.
--------------------- W.P (C) No.31101 of 2015 --------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner apprehends rejection of his nomination on the ground that his community certificate is cancelled. The writ petition is purely anticipatory in nature. The petitioner can have a grievance only in case the nomination is not accepted.
2. The petitioner is yet to be served with the order cancelling his community certificate. Ext.P5 notification in the web site cannot be impugned. It is open to the petitioner to take proceedings appropriately. The petitioner is free to urge his contentions at the time of scrutiny of his nomination. There is also a constitutional bar for this Court to interfere in the election process. Article 243-O of the Constitution of India is categoric. I therefore decline jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Writ Petition fails. Dismissed.
Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.
nj/14.10.15