WILSON MATHEW Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a resident of Ward No.19 (formerly Ward No.18) of Kunnamkulam Municipality. It is submitted that with a view to contest in the ensuing elections to the Kunnamkulam Municipality the petitioner has submitted his nomination in the prescribed form. THE grievance voiced by the petitioner is that though his name appeared along with that of his wife in Ext.P3 draft voters list, when the final voters list evidenced by Ext.P2 was published, his name was deleted while that of his wife was retained. Relying on Ext.P1 voters list prepared at the time of the elections held in the year 2005, wherein the name of the petitioner was shown in the voters list relating to Ward No.18 (now Ward No.19), petitioner contends that deletion of his name from the final electoral roll evidenced by Ext.P2 was done without notice to him and behind his back and that it was engineered by the rival candidates. On this ground the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-

(2.) THE petitioner does not dispute the fact that Ext.P2 final electoral roll was published on 16.8.2010. Under section 85(8) of the Kerala Municipality Act, a candidate who proposes to contest in the elections to the Municipality or the Corporation, as the case may be, has to be a candidate whose name appears in the electoral roll relating to any of the Wards of that Municipality or Corporation. THErefore, the petitioner should have, in my opinion, made enquiries as to whether in Ext.P2 voters list published on 16.8.2010 his name has been included as a voter of Ward No.19. For reasons best known to him the petitioner did not make such an enquiry. THE petitioner, who was not alert or vigilant in ensuring that his name is included in the electoral roll of Ward No.19 of Kunnamkulam Municipality, cannot at this point of time, when the scrutiny of nominations is being conducted, seek the intervention of this Court with a view to ensure that his nomination is accepted and acted upon. I am therefore of the opinion that the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. THE writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.