SANTHIGIRI ASHRAM Vs. TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners seek writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to permit them to cast their votes in the ensuing General Elections in Kerala. First petitioner is Santhigiri Ashram and petitioners 2 to 135 are its inmates.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners that when the draft voters' list was published their names were found omitted, that they immediately filed applications in Form No.6 requesting for inclusion of their names in the voters' list, that the first respondent issued a notice dated 23-3-1991 requiring them to appear before him on 30-3-1991 and that on account of the tension prevailing in the locality they could not do so. On knowing that their applications for inclusion of their names in the amended list were rejected by the first respondent they filed appeals before the second respondent. Petitioners contend that they could not appear before the first respondent on account of the prevailing tension and disorderly situation in the locality and as they apprehended danger to life.

(3.) Petitioners submitted that they may be allowed to exercise their franchise at least with some conditions imposed. Suggestion is that their ballot papers may be kept in a separate box and it be separately counted. Learned Advocate General submitted that the above request cannot be granted as they are not voters as per the electoral roll. He pointed out that as an opportunity was afforded to them to appear before the first respondent on 30-3-1991 and as they failed to avail the same prayer to allow them to exercise their franchise cannot be allowed as the Representation of the People Act (hereafter referred to as the Act) does not envisage any such position. Another contention is that the O.P. itself is not maintainable as the Court has no power to direct the first respondent to include the petitioners' names in the voters' list as the last date of making nominations is already over.