JOSEPH Vs. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ANGAMALY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner and the second respondent were the contesting candidates at the Panchayat election from Ward No.VIII to the Manjapra Panchayat. The Returning Officer, on counting the votes treated four votes invalid. It was then found that the rival contesting candidates secured 519 votes each. He then drew lots and declared the second respondent elected. Petitioner filed an election petition before the Munsiff of Alwaye, joining the second respondent and the Returning Officer alone as respondents. A preliminary objection was raised by the second respondent regarding the maintainability of the election petition on the ground that all the seven candidates who were duly nominated to the election were not joined in the election petition. Learned Munsiff upheld the preliminary objection and dismissed the election petition, by Ext. P1 order. This Original Petition is in challenge of Ext. P1.

(2.) It is not disputed that there were altogether seven persons who submitted nominations whose nominations were accepted by the Returning Officer, but all the others (except the petitioner and the second respondent) withdrew from the field before the due date for withdrawal and hence the petitioner and the second respondent alone remained for contest.

(3.) R.5(3) of the Kerala Panchayats (Decision of Election Disputes) Rules, 1963 (for short 'the Rules') requires that a petitioner shall join as respondents to his petition "all the candidates who were duly nominated at the election other than himself if he was so nominated". Sub-rule (8) enjoins on the Munsiff to dismiss the petition if sub-rule (3) is not complied with. Learned Munsiff, in support of his conclusion that the petition is not in compliance with the sub-rule (3), has relied on the decisions of this Court reported in Khader v. Damodaran, 1965 KLT 1036 and Krishnankutty Nair v. Joseph ( 1981 KLT 565 ).