K.v.Sarala v. Alex
Case brief
What is this about?
A two-judge bench of the Kerala High Court dismissed an appeal challenging the State Election Commission's decision. The Court upheld that a Councillor was not disqualified under Section 91(1)(f) of the Kerala Municipality Act as the agreement was a community contribution, not a personal contract.
What did the court decide?
The judgment of the learned Single Judge was set aside, and the order of the State Election Commission in O.P. No. 47 of 2013 dated 01.03.2014 was restored.
What the court decided
W.A.No. 294/2016
: 1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1942
WA.No.294 OF 2016
JUDGMENT IN WPC 9959/2014 DATED 14-12-2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/2nd RESPONDENT:
K.V.SARALA
COUNCILOR, WARD NO.8, ALUVA MUNICIPALITY, RESIDING AT KUNDALA HOUSE, MANAPPURAM ROAD, THOTTAKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA-683 108. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.) SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 1ST RESPONDENT:
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a Councillor is disqualified if she offers property as security for amounts advanced by the Municipality to an ad hoc committee for community work.
Whether the benefit under Rule 3(iii) applies when the work is for the community benefit and not undertaken as a contractor.
Whether the dispute should be decided based on pleadings regarding the 17.02.2012 agreement or the 31.01.2012 agreement.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K.V.SARALA
- respondent
1 ALEX
- respondent
THE KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION
- respondent
SHAHIN JOJO
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court