Disposed

Ganesan v. Sureshkumar

Kerala HC9 Aug 2016OP(C)/1860/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner sought an order expediting the disposal of an election petition pending before the Munsiff Court, Devikulam, alleging unreasonable delay under Section 93(5) of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act. The High Court directed the lower court to dispose of the case within four months.

What did the court decide?

The Munsiff, Devikulam is directed to expedite the disposal of O.P(Ele.) No.1 of 2015 within four months from 30.08.2016. A copy of the judgment is directed to be communicated to the concerned court i

Ganesan Vs Sureshkumar — Election Law | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/18TH SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

OP(C).No. 1860 of 2016 (O)

¶6

OP(ELECTION) 1/2015 OF MUNSIFF COURT, DEVICOLAM.

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶8

GANESAN,

¶9

AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.MUTHAYYA, ANIL BHAVAN, ERACHILPARA, DEVIKULAM - 685 613.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.L.RAM MOHAN SRI.M.AUBREY ABRAHAM ISAAC

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1.SURESHKUMAR,

¶13

AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.KUMARAN, EDAKKATTIL HOUSE, DEVIKULAM KARA, KDH VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK - 685 613.

¶14

2.ANIL KUMAR, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.GANESAN, ANIL BHAVAN, ERACHILPARA, DEVIKULAM - 685 613.`

¶15

3.THE RETURNING OFFICER,

¶16

G013, DEVIKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, LSG ELECTIONS OF THE YEAR 2015, TALUK SUPPLY OFFICE, DEVIKULAM P.O. - 685 613.

¶17

R3 BY ADV.SRI.S.GOPINATHAN

¶18

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

mbr/

¶20

OP(C).No. 1860 of 2016 (O)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶23

P1 : OP(ELECTION) 1/2015 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT DEVEIKULAM.

¶24

P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO. 188/16 IN OP(ELECTION) 1/2015.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶31

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = O.P(C) No.1860 of 2016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 09^th day of August, 2016

¶32

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the court below for an early

¶33

disposal of the case, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶34

It is alleged in the petition that

¶35

petitioner filed O.P(Ele) No.1 of 2015 before the Munsiff's Court, Devikulam challenging the election of the first respondent as the elected candidate from Ward 12 of G103 Devikulam Grama Panchayath in the election held in the year 2015 on the ground that rejection of nomination paper of the petitioner is not valid in law. Though the election petition was filed in the year 2015 itself, it has not been disposed of so far.

¶36

O.P(c) No.1860 of 2016

¶37

-: 2 :-

¶38

As per Section 93(5) of the Kerala

¶39

Panchayath Raj Act (for short, “the Act”) election petitions will have to be disposed of within six months of filing of the election petitions. It is submitted that unless a direction is issued, there is no possibility of the disposal of the election petition. Hence this petition.

¶40

Considering the nature of the reliefs sought for, this Court felt that the petition can be disposed of after getting a status report from the concerned court and dispensing notice to the respondents. Accordingly, a report has been called for and the learned Munsiff has sent a report which reads as follows:

¶41

“With reference to the above, OP(Election) 1/2015 was filed 16.11.2015. In this OP the 3^rd respondent, the Returning Officer filed application under Order 1 Rule 10

¶42

O.P(c) No.1860 of 2016

¶43

-: 3 :-

¶44

(2) of CPC as IA No.188/2015 dated 10/02/2016 and in that IA the petitioner filed objection. Now this case is posted for hearing on 30.08.2016 that petition.”

¶45

Heard the learned counsel for the

¶46

petitioner.

¶47

Election petition was filed as early as on 16.11.2015. As per Section 93(5) of the Act, efforts must be taken by the courts to dispose of the election petitions as expeditiously as possible,

¶48

at any rate, within six months of filing of the election petitions. So the grievance of the petitioner appears to be genuine. So this Court feels that the petition can be disposed of as follows:

¶49

The Munsiff, Devikulam is directed to expedite the disposal of O.P(Ele.) No.1 of 2015 of that court as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a

¶50

O.P(c) No.1860 of 2016

¶51

-: 4 :-

¶52

period of four months from 30.08.2016 on which

¶53

date the case is now posted.

¶54

Petition is disposed of with the above

¶55

observations and directions.

¶56

Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this judgment to the concerned court immediately.

¶57

Sd/- K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶58

VSV

¶59

/true copy/

Ganesan v. Sureshkumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesan v. Sureshkumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Proper Products Private Limited Vs S.Mohandas

Muhammed Ashiq Vs Shaboom Farsana

Afsal a Vs Muhammedkutty

Parvathi Soorya Vs Kalathil Nabesa

Vipin Lal N. Vs Narayani Amma

Bimal T. Vs Muthoot Vehicle & Asset Finance Ltd.