SIVADASAN, K. G. Vs. P. V. SIVADASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent in O.P. (Election) No. 3 of 2000 on the file of Munsiff's Court, Adoor is the revision petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner as well as the respondent contested from Ward No. 10 of Kadampanadu Grama Panchayat for the election held to Local Authorities on 25-9-2000. The revision petitioner is the returned candidate. The respondent filed an Election Petition for a declaration that the election of the revision petitioner is void on two grounds: (i) The nomination filed by the respondent was improperly rejected and (ii) the nomination of the revision petitioner was improperly accepted overruling the objections raised by the respondent that the revision petitioner is not a member of the Scheduled Caste.

(3.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of the Civil Revision Petition are as follows: The revision petitioner as well as the respondent were candidates who filed nominations for contesting the election from the 10th Ward of Kadampanadu Grama Panchayat. That particular constituency was reserved for members of Scheduled Caste. The respondent is a voter in the 13th Constituency. His name is registered in the electoral roll of 13th constituency as Roll No. 266, Part II. It is averred that the respondent was duly nominated to the 10th Constituency of the said Grama Panchayat, but his nomination was improperly rejected by the Returning Officer. The last date for filing nomination was 1-9-2000 and the scrutiny was to be held on 2-9-2000. The respondent filed two nominations to contest from the 10th Constituency before the Returning Officer. One nomination was proposed by one Jayakumar, who was a voter from 10th Constituency and the other by one Remasan who was also a voter from the same Constituency. The nominations also contained a declaration that the respondent belongs to a Scheduled Caste candidate, Thandan (not being Ezhava). The respondent had made security deposit also. At the time of scrutiny held on 2-9-2000, an objection was raised that the respondent was in arrears of some of amount to the Government of Kerala for which Revenue Recovery proceedings were initiated. According to the respondent, overruling his request to refer the matter to the Election Commission for a decision, the Returning Officer rejected his nomination. It was contended that he was not disqualified to contest in the election on account of the disqualification provided under S.34(1)(j) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act ("Act" for short) or under any other provision. It was specifically contended that no amount was due from the respondent to the Government of Kerala or Kadampanadu Grama Panchayat. It is admitted that in the year 1993 a Revenue Recovery proceedings was initiated against the petitioner as R.R. 29/1993 of Adoor Taluk Office for realising certain amounts stated to be due from the respondent to the State Bank of Travancore, Kadampanadu Branch as arrears of the loan granted under the Self Employment Scheme. It is contended that loan itself was granted by the S.B.T., Kadampanadu Branch under the Self Employment Scheme sponsored by the Central Government. The Government of Kerala by order dated 7-11-1997 stayed the Revenue Recovery Proceedings against the respondent and granted instalment facility. It was contended that the said order was not vacated and no notice of demand was served on the respondent after 7-11-1997. It was also contended that the respondent raised an objection regarding the candidature of the revision petitioner on the ground that he is not a member of the Scheduled Caste and as such he was disqualified to contest from the 10th Constituency of Kadampanadu Grama Panchayat as the same was a Constituency reserved specifically for members of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. It was contended that the revision petitioner is a Christian and his family members and close relatives profess Christianity. It was contended that the Christian name of the revision petitioner is Johnson and his family members are members of St. Mary's Malankara Catholic Church, Thoovayoor Vadacku, Anthichira. It was averred that the revision petitioner was acting as the Altar Boy of the said Church till June, 2000. He was the Secretary of an internal organisation of the Church by name Vincent De Paul. He was also acting as the District Treasurer of Malankara Catholic Youth Movement (KCYM), Adoor Ecclesiastical District till December, 1999. It was also contended that the revision petitioner contested in the election to the post of District Secretary of that organisation in the year 2000-2001, but he was defeated. It was contended that the Christian name of the father of the petitioner was George. He was also professing Christianity and after his death, his dead body was cremated in the St. Mary's Malankara Catholic Church. It was contended that with the intention of contesting the election, he got himself enrolled his name as K.G. Sivadasan and his father's name was stated as Daivathan Gopalan in the electoral roll. It was contended that before filing the nomination, the revision petitioner fraudulently got a Caste Certificate to the effect that he is a member of Pulaya Community, a community of Scheduled Caste, though he is not a member of that community. It was contended that the result of the election has been materially affected by the improper acceptance of the nomination of the revision petitioner. Hence the petition to declare the election of the revision petitioner from the 10th Constituency of Kadampanadu Panchayat as void.