VIJAY GARG Vs. P SATHEESHKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the sake of convenience and easy reference, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petitions.

(2.) Both these matters pertain to the election to fill up five vacancies of Member posts to the third respondent/Council of Architecture. The writ petitioners have filed the writ petitions before the learned single Judge, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to the Union of India, represented by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Human Resources and Development to appoint Returning Officer to conduct the election to fill up the five vacancies in the second respondent Council under Section 3(3)(a) of the Architects Act, 1972 among the Members of the Indian Institute of Architects, Chennai.

(3.) In their writ petitions, the writ petitioners have contended that they are the Architects registered with the Council of Architecture, New Delhi and they are also the members of the Indian Institute of Architects. Pursuant to the notice issued by the respondents 4 and 5 who are the appellants herein, the writ petitioners have filed their nominations for the posts of Members and since they were rejected by the 6th respondent/the Scrutineer appointed for the purpose, they have filed the writ petitions. The writ petitioners would impart motives to the respondents 4 and 5 therein, who are the appellants herein and also to the 6th respondent/the Scrutineer. As the learned single Judge has allowed the said writ petitions, the respondents 4 and 5 therein have come forward to file these writ appeals.