Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Nafeesa K vs State Election Commission on 2 June, 2016

Author: K.Vinod Chandran

Bench: K.Vinod Chandran

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT:

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

         THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2016/12TH JYAISHTA, 1938

                      WP(C).No. 18147 of 2014 (P)
                      ----------------------------


PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
------------------------

            NAFEESA K, AGED 50
            W/O.SULAIMAN, PARQAKKAL HOUSE, PANAMANNA P O, PALAKKAD
            DIST, MEMBER, WARD NO 2, ANANGANADI GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
            PALAKKAD DIST


            BY ADV. SRI.E.S.ASHRAF

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
--------------------------

          1. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION
            OFFICE OF THE STATE ELECTIN COMMISSION,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

          2. N MUHAMMED ALI
            S/O.KUTTU, NEDUMKANDATHIL VEEDU, PAVUKONAM P O, (VIA)
            VANIYANKULAM, MEMBER, WARD NO 13, ANANGANADI, GRAMA
            PANCHAYATH, PALAKKAD DIST, PIN-678002

          3. THE SECRETARY
            ANANAGANADI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PALAKKAD DIST, PIN-678001


            R1  BY ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM

       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
       ON  02-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
        FOLLOWING:



                     K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
                  =====================
                   W.P.(C) No.18147 of 2014 - P
                 ======================
                Dated this the 02nd day of June, 2016

                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioner who was elected as a member, was disqualified for the reason that the petitioner had received the sitting fees as a member of the Committee of the Local Self Government Institutions and had also received salary from the Government as an aided school teacher.

2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission submits that the disqualification would be co- termings with the term of the Panchayath Committee, which has expired and new Committee has taken charge, as per the decision of this Court reported in Krishna Kumar v. State Election Commission [2010(4) KLT 84].

In such circumstance, the writ petition filed against the disqualification would stand closed as infructuous.

Sd/-

                                         K. VINOD CHANDRAN,
                                                        JUDGE
SB/ 02/06/2016                    // true copy //
                                           P.A to Judge.