SUNI VARGHESE Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the elected member of Manimala Grama Panchayat from Ward No.13. The petitioner was also elected as Chairperson for the Standing Committee for Welfare of the said Grama Panchayat. As per Ext.P1, the 4th respondent moved a motion of no confidence against him. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent, the returning officer convened a special meeting of the members to consider the said no confidence motion.

(2.) After the discussions, the no confidence motion was put to vote. The ballot papers were supplied to the parties and the petitioner. The said ballot paper contains two columns, one to oppose the no confidence motion and other one to support the no confidence motion. The petitioner marked 'X' in the corresponding column intended to oppose the no-confidence motion, whereas the 5th respondent wrote in the corresponding column for supporting the motion as, "supporting the no confidence motion". On the other hand, the 4th respondent put a 'v' mark on the corresponding column to support the no confidence motion. The petitioner immediately raised an objection to the effect that, the marking of the votes on the ballot made by the 4th and 5th respondents were not in tune with the requirements contemplated in Ext.P2 guidelines specified by the Election Commission in this regard. According to the petitioner, Ext.P2 contemplates for putting an 'X' mark for casting the vote, and since the same was not followed by the 4th and 5th respondents, the votes of the said respondents cannot be treated as valid.

(3.) Since a dispute has been raised in this regard, the publication of result was put on hold and a clarification was sought by the 2nd respondent from the 1st respondent. In response to the same, Ext.P5 was issued by the 1st respondent Election Commission, wherein it was ordered that, the decision has to be taken by the 2nd respondent taking note of the intention of the voters as reflected from the ballot papers. Accordingly, Ext.P6 notice was issued by the 2nd respondent publishing the results of the no confidence motion by which the no confidence motion was declared as passed. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging Exts.P5 and P6 communications.