A.M.NAJEEM Vs. P.BHARATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Writ Appeals arise from the common judgment, dated 09.01.2019, of a learned single judge in W.P.(C).Nos.24682, 29145, 29228 and 29268 of 2018. For the sake of convenience the reference to facts and exhibits is from W.P. (C).No.29145 of 2018, that was preferred by Sri.A.M.Najeem, who was holding the post of elected President of the Muttil Grama Panchayat, Wayanad district. The averments in the writ petition would indicate that Sri.Najeem was elected as a member of the Grama Panchayath, and later as the President of the Panchayat. It was the case of the petitioner that, on 04.07.2018, he resigned from the post of President for personal reasons. The Secretary of the respondent Panchayat is stated to have issued Ext.P1 acknowledgment in token of having received the resignation letter from the petitioner and forwarded a copy of the same to the State Election Commission. It is stated that, thereafter, the Secretary also convened an urgent meeting of the Panchayat Committee to discuss the resignation of the petitioner from the post of President. In the meeting that was held on 06.07.2018, this fact was recorded. It would appear that, thereafter, on 11.07.2018, a clarification was sought from the petitioner, by the Secretary, based on a telephonic instruction received by the latter from the office of the Election Commission. The petitioner was then informed that, as per his resignation letter, he had resigned not only from the post of President of the Panchayath, but also from his membership in the Panchayat Committee. The petitioner, who apparently was taken by surprise at the said communication, preferred Ext.P6 complaint before the State Election Commission, wherein he explained that he had resigned only from the post of President, and not from the membership of the Panchayat, and that this fact was acknowledged by the Secretary of the Panchayat. The petitioner also stated that, after his resignation, while giving back the Panchayat files, he was made to sign another form in which, of the three options, namely, President, Vice President, and Member, the option of Vice President alone was struck off, and it was this form, on which his signature was fraudulently obtained, that found its way into the files of the Election Commission. The proceedings before the State Election Commission with regard to the subject of resignation of the petitioner, culminated in Ext.P10 order of the State Election Commission, which found that the resignation letter submitted by the petitioner to the Secretary of the Panchayat clearly indicated that he had resigned not only from the post of President of the Panchayat but also from the membership of the Panchayat. The version of the petitioner that he was made to sign another document fraudulently was disbelieved by the election commission which viewed it as an afterthought of the petitioner. In W.P(C).No.29145 of 2018, the petitioner impugned Ext.P10 order of the Election Commission on various grounds including that it was one that was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.

(2.) It would appear that, in the meanwhile, and pending resolution of the dispute as to whether the petitioner had resigned merely from the post of President or whether he had resigned from the membership of the Panchayath as well, on 24.07.2018, a no confidence motion was proposed against the Vice President of the Panchayat. There was also a Presidential election that was scheduled to be held on 28.07.2018. On a clarification sought by the Panchayat as regards the entitlement of the petitioner to continue as a member till the issue was finally adjudicated by the Election Commission, the Election Commission, by its communication dated 21.07.2018, informed the Panchayat that the petitioner could continue to function as a member till the issue was finally adjudicated by the Election Commission. This led to one P.Bharathan, a member of the Muttil Grama Panchayath, approaching this Court through W.P (C).No.24682 of 2018 impugning the said communication of the Election Commission. The relief sought for in the said writ petition was for a direction to the respondents to restrain Sri.Najeem from participating in any of the meetings to be conducted in the respondent Panchayath, including the no confidence motion to be conducted against the Vice President of the Panchayat on 24.07.2018 and the President election to be conducted on 28.07.2018. In the said writ petition, by an interim order dated 23.07.2018, the learned Single Judge directed that the no confidence motion proposed to be conducted on 24.07.2018, as well as the Presidential election scheduled to take place on 28.07.2018, would be subject to the result of the writ petition.

(3.) In the Presidential election that was held on 28.07.2018, one C.K.Balakrishnan, who was a contestant to the said post, won the election on the majority of a single vote. Impugning the declaration of Sri.C.K.Balakrishnan as the President of the Panchayat, W.P(C).No.29228 of 2018 was preferred by Sri.P.Bharathan seeking a declaration that the election of Sri.C.K.Balakrishnan as President of the respondent Panchayat on the strength of the single majority vote of Sri.Najeem was not valid, and therefore, legally unsustainable. W.P(C).No.29268 of 2018 was also filed by Smt.Sheeja Sebastian, who was an elected member from the 10 th Ward of the respondent Grama Panchayt, as also the elected Vice President of the said Panchayat. In her writ petition, she alleged that, in the no confidence motion held on 24.07.2018, the motion was carried on the strength of the single majority vote of Sri.Najeem, who had been permitted to participate in the no confidence motion. In her writ petition, the relief prayed for, was for a declaration that the no confidence motion so passed, ousting her from the post of Vice President on the strength of the single majority vote of Sri.Najeem, was invalid and legally unsustainable. There was also a prayer seeking for a direction to the Election Commission to reinstate her as Vice President of the respondent Panchayat.